Looks like there are going to be several of these, but none featuring Teresa May. And if she’s not turning up, Jeremy Corbyn says he won’t turn up either!
I think this is a big mistake – he should be volunteering to appear with the other leaders and be happy to face an empty lectern from the Conservative Party.
Corbyn could make this a theatrical spectacle to physically demonstrate what (I assume) he thinks this election is – a coup by right-wing Conservatives. If he plays it well, and with humour, it could even “go viral” and make lightbulbs go off in heads.
(John Motson voice)
He’s in front of an open goal!
The ball is at his feet!
Corbyn must score! …
…oh.
He’s wandered off!
Yep. Corbyn at the lectern on the left (of course) and on the other lectern… A bag of spuds.
Meanwhile we hear Cliff singing “It’s so funny.. How we don’t talk anymore…”
Yeah, but you don’t actually want him to win, do you?
Sadly, I haven’t seen any evidence that he’s capable of even tapping one in.
It wouldn’t play well if he did it. The Tories would spin it as a bunch of disparate minor parties abandoning their principles to gang up on them – the coalition of chaos. And Corbyn’s abject failure as Leader of the Opposition to mount any kind of challenge to the Government would be exposed.
Coalition of Chaos sounds too much like Masters of Mayhem.
JC should run with this , paint the battle bus black and promise to rule Metal Britannia with Iron Justice Keir “Stormer” at his side.
I look at it the other way.
Labour leader takes part, Labour Party can legitimately say “well, we’re taking part in this election debate, doesn’t look as though the Tory Party give a fig for such open discussion.”
What are we to make of a PM that won’t appear before the voting public and engage in political debate? They’re meant to be good at this kind of thing arent they? I know I am criticising Corbyn in the OP, but the bigger mistake is the arrogance of the PM.
She debates with him every week at PMQs.
Is that you, Theresa?
Seriously, how many people get the opportunity to watch PMQs? Plus, it only runs for half an hour…And in a debate, the questions wouldn’t be fixed by the Opposition or obsequious toadies.
JC asks a prepared question, TM gives a prepared response (which may or may not be an “answer “). If that’s debate I say they should do paper scissors stone instead.
While I am not proposing that PMQs are any sort of great debate, it’s not the prepared questions and prepared answers where they score: it’s the quality, or perhaps I should say venomousness, of the follow ups that determine how successful the respective leaders are.
TM v JC is a foregone conclusion each week. She’s not particularly capable but he is abysmal. A more suitable opponent for him, punching at the same sort of weight, would be IDS.
Most of us don’t see PMQs, but we do see the very edited highlight on the news.
When she was home secretary her shadow was Yvette Cooper who barely landed a glove on her. I’m no big fan but the inconvenient truth is she prepares well and knows the details. Whilst I don’t intend to vote Tory I won’t be as worried with PM May as I would be with PM Corbyn.
I thought that Yvette Cooper did rather well as Shadow Home Sec. Dull world if we all thought the same etc.
I’ll tell you what though, this would be a rather different election if Labour had chosen Yvette Cooper as leader.
Yes she was my choice.
Yes, I would like to ask her whether she agrees with me that Britain needs a strong and stable leadership to better promote Britain’s interests in the forthcoming Brexit negotiations? I’d like to see her wriggle out of that one!
What I’m hearing from pro-Corbyn Labour supporters via social media is “JC isn’t given a fair crack of the whip by the main stream media and if people only got to hear his policies they’d realise what a great PM he’d make”.
Why then would he pass up the chance to speak directly to the British public on a scale that, as Black Type says, dwarfs the PMQs audience?
It’s not as if they won’t be appearing at all. Both Corbyn and May have agreed to the Question Time format in front of an audience, as we had in 2015.
And to be honest the multi-way debates with leaders of all the parties involved are pretty useless, generating more heat than light. The only way TV debates really work is in a presidential-style head to head and our political system doesn’t lend itself to that.
That might actually be interesting as neither if them show much sign of wanting to respond to people who properly disagree with them.
A debate between them would be good precisely because they both seem weirdly thin-skinned. Good telly… not necessarily good politics.
The media thing is so very rich. Literally Corbyn’s first act in the job was to directly slag off the mainstream media, and announce that he planned to reach people by mysterious “other means”. Seemed a massive political miscalculation at the time, but each to their own.
Here we are now, less than 2 years later, and the perma-whine is that “the media won’t give Jeremy a fair shake”. Of course they bloody won’t, because (a) he publicly told them to do one; and (b) they’ve concluded (quite sensibly) that he’s an unelectable half wit.
I don’t think it will make a blind bit of difference whether or not he turns up to TV debates. He won’t win, and he won’t step down afterwards without knowing he can hand the reins to one of his acolytes.
The worst thing Labour can do is win the election. The Tories gave us Brexit, they should preside over it and be at the helm when the good ship Britannia hits the rocks. Credit where credit is due
I take it all back. That was a very revealing interview on The One Show. I had no idea that she felt like that about shoes and who should put the rubbish out.
How nice of the BBC to make her look so friendly and lovely!
I wonder if they’ll still be happy about that when they’ve been privatised?
Mind you after the disgraceful way Tim Farron was tormented for being a Christian when he has an impeccable record on equalities legislation I’m not surprised they aren’t keen on talking to the press. I suspect Robert Peston was getting a chubby going on and on about gay sex. Can you imagine a similar conversation if Farron were Muslim?
Except is not impeccable is it? He abstained on the third reading of the gay marriage bill in 2013; in 2007 he voted against the Equality Act (Sexual Orientation) Regulations which outlawed discrimination on the grounds of sexual orientation in the provision of goods and services; and this year he abstained from a vote to decriminalise abortion.
When the leader of a political party holds such strong religious views it strikes me as perfectly reasonable to explore how those views might influence policy and decision-making.
And Sadiq Khan’s faith was certainly explored by the media during the London mayoral election.
To the extent that politicians make their faith part of their campaign platform I’d agree it’s worth understanding. Goldsmith’s electoral pitch for London Mayor could hardly have tried harder (and lower).
What stands out here is the contrast between the inspection of Farron’s faith and that of May – both committed Christians. Farron has voted 6 times in favour of gay rights, once against and abstained 3 times. May has had more opportunities to vote, casting 8 for, 10 against and abstaining 9 times. Both have always voted in favor of same sex marriage barring one abstinence (?) each.
Farron’s record may not be impeccable but it’s pretty strong and a lot more positive than May’s. Although nothing like as strong as Corbyn’s, not that anyone cares…..
Re: “one abstinence (?) each”
“abstention”, maybe?
Now you’ve put that I’m wondering wtf I was thinking saying abstinence.
The Labour Party manifesto has been leaked.
Nationalising the Royal Mail and the Railways, getting rid of tuition fees and fracking, and (presumably) not bringing back fox hunting.
What is Corbyn thinking of? An absolute disgrace.
I know! At this rate people might start looking at policies instead of personalities; maybe even nodding their heads (at any party’s manifesto) as muttering, ‘They’ve got a point’.
Re; the leaked manifesto.
It’s almost made me want to vote Labour again.
Ooooh, so close, but still not a full vote actually secured for Labour there, so the Swing-o-meter continues to hang glumly intumescent.
It’s a dreamy-eyed wish-list that ‘manifesto’ isn’t it, a hurried grab-bag of largely tankie-friendly ideas designed to take us boldly forward into the ’70s. It’s got some admirable objectives, no question, but across the piece I can’t see it appealing to many Millennials (“Grandad, what’s ‘Nationalisation’ and who’s clamouring for it?”), and I just don’t think Corbyn has anything like the credibility around deliverability that’d be needed to drag floaters back from the Tories and LibDems in sufficient number. Sadly, I think people will continue to stay away from Labour in droves.
I will, however, despite my contempt for Corbyn and his utter uselessness, continue to give Labour a whole vote, not in any expectation of electoral success but simply to nullify someone else’s vote for my current representative, Fred Scuttle (C, Reading East): http://zelo-street.blogspot.co.uk/2015/05/rob-wilson-say-sorry.html?m=1
You would have thought though, that if Corbyn is expecting me to turn out to vote for his manifesto on June 8, he could at least have turned out this morning to launch it.
This is the first time I have no idea who to vote for. Mind you, I’ve only been allowed to vote in the last three General Elections. Re: the leaked manifesto, I’m curious to know if there’s a way you could compare previous manifestos and see which promises were kept/abandoned/ignored.
Wot, THE Tony Japanese? The one that the song’s about?
Aaaaanyway, voting and manifesto comparisons:
– if you want to vote tactically to get the Tories out, have a look at this https://www.tactical2017.com/
– the only thing I can find re comparing previous manifestos is this http://www.whoshallivotefor.com/policies/compare which compares the parties’ 2015 manifestos with each other; that would give you some sort of benchmark I suppose, though it’s really far too recent and, besides, there’s been bugger-all policy / action coming out of Government since the Referendum. As for comparing delivery against promises made in manifestos from further back, well, that’d be an undertaking that surely even the nerdiest of politics nerds would quail before
I really think so.
They want to do things differently from the Tories. I don’t get it. Is that even allowed?
I think it’s brilliant. A real alternative. Let’s see how many people go for it. The problem is not the ideas, many of which I quite like, but the people who will apparently deliver it who I think are complete idiots based on what seems like an inept performance to date. I’m intrigued to see how it plays out. I suspect it’s actually Jeremy’s case to his base for staying leader after the electoral rout rather then a realistic manifesto.
The test will come when the likes of Diane Abbott and others are pressed on how the numbers stack up. The Green Party proposal for a Citizens income seemed like a great idea until Natalie Bennett was pressed on the funding. Then it all went wrong.
What’s wrong with Diana Abbott? London politics needs a Clay Davis like everywhere else…
Todays leaked manifesto is exactly the sort of manifesto we should be getting from a Labour party. I’m warming to Corbyn because of his dogged refusal to back down against enormous odds. If he can consistently get his message out that all this good stuff will be paid for by the rich elite he may make more headway than we think. How he thinks he’ll deliver it is something else. The Tories are being Tories and Mrs May will get my vote this time. Corbyn is making Labour Labour again and fair play to him I hope they continue this path after their defeat because it means we have a clear choice again as opposed to Blairs Tory light. I still hope for a 3rd way one day but the Labour party found in this manifesto should be there for the balance that it brings.
The problem Dave is the people who will deliver it, and quite frankly when I see the likes of Len McCluskey grinning like a cheshire cat saying he agrees with the manifesto is frankly laughable. He has the most to gain, he owns Corbyn in all but name and I shiver at the prospect that he would have a say in how we would be governed. The manifesto is full of great ideals – free tuition and nationalising the railways is hard to argue against on the face of it but it just doesn’t stack up. Notwithstanding the cock up of rail privatisation, BR was an effing disgrace and the unions were one reason why this was so (my dad worked for BR all his life, and he was no Tory, yet he cursed the actions of the unions). Free tuition is a great aim but how can this country pay for it when so many people go to uni these days ?I feel a hell of a churl saying this having benefited from full grants but a relatively small percentage of the population went to uni in my time, now a far higher proportion go (which is good) but can we afford subsidising all this, including free adult education in addition to all the other promises ?
I will never warm to Corbyn, he leads a cult and his whining about media misrepresentation is beyond tiresome. Don’t complain about the media when you and your acolytes have taken the shilling from Russian and Iranian state media (neither of whom would win any awards for impartiality).
I will consider returning to Labour when they have got rid of those clowns posturing as a leadership.
Normally if someone’s foot gets run over it’s regarded as a bad thing. But look at the smiles here:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/election-2017-39882969
(they’ve changed the picture to a video)
Love the fact that moments before the incident you hear someone say, ‘Don’t get run over, mate.’
Corbyn’s main problem is that he doesn’t appear to have a sense of humour.
If you can’t make headway with the one about the Conservative Prime Minister, re-elected just two years ago (7th May 2015), who didn’t want his country to leave Europe, and so called a referendum on whether his country should remain in Europe, which he didn’t need to, and then proceeded to lose that referendum … well, you ain’t really trying.
Earnest, brow-furrowed, mutterings are all very good, but I’d be inclined to go for the scorn and ridicule option.