@paulwaugh: At last! Broadcasters statement: 'We welcome David Cameron’s willingness to participate in the first TV debate on April 2nd...'
@paulwaugh: But add: "The broadcasters are continuing to work with all political parties on progs scheduled for March 26, April 16 and April 30"
They offered it to Cameron, who agreed it and announced it.
I better get that empty chair with Cameron written in big letters on the front back out of the garage.
So it sounds like little has changed. The broadcasters are still planning three debates, Cameron has agreed to the first one, and will have to decide whether he will turn up or not for the second and third.
It seems like the second one can just go ahead with the other six parties. The third debate is more questionable, as the broadcasters will be unable to go ahead with just Miliband. The most likely outcome is the broadcasters extending an invite to Clegg and Farage for that debate. That will be very dangerous for David Cameron, as a Clegg, Farage and Miliband final debate may well be seen as the main event.
The proposals to which Cam has agreed for April 16th and 30th are not debates.
Yes, it seems like Cameron has agreed to attend the first debate, and in addition two other events, but has not agreed to the second and third debates. I suspect the second and third debates will still go ahead without him. So we may well get a separate event with Cameron preceding a debate with everyone else on the 16th and the 30th.
There are no second and third debates under the new proposals, the second debate is a Challenger debate and the third is a programme with DC EM and NC. DC and NC have accepted the new proposals
@Eastwinger And Cam gets to dictate terms to the lesser mortals? That is going to look good for a Prime Minister who is rumoured to be aloof and out of touch.
Get real, the broadcasters aren't stupid. They know that they don't have much of a program without the PM being included. They obviously have to compromise to get any kind of a show for the viewers.
I can understand why Labour aren't happy about it but they are not the ones holding the cards.
Our elections aint that scumbag Cameron's toy!
I wanted the earlier debate proposals too, but the debates aren't the elections, so I'm less mad about the debates being treated like a toy. Each side wants the best version for themselves. If Cameron wins, he wins. not big deal, just less entertainment.
@paulwaugh: At last! Broadcasters statement: 'We welcome David Cameron’s willingness to participate in the first TV debate on April 2nd...'
@paulwaugh: But add: "The broadcasters are continuing to work with all political parties on progs scheduled for March 26, April 16 and April 30"
They offered it to Cameron, who agreed it and announced it.
I better get that empty chair with Cameron written in big letters on the front back out of the garage.
So it sounds like little has changed. The broadcasters are still planning three debates, Cameron has agreed to the first one, and will have to decide whether he will turn up or not for the second and third.
It seems like the second one can just go ahead with the other six parties. The third debate is more questionable, as the broadcasters will be unable to go ahead with just Miliband. The most likely outcome is the broadcasters extending an invite to Clegg and Farage for that debate. That will be very dangerous for David Cameron, as a Clegg, Farage and Miliband final debate may well be seen as the main event.
The proposals to which Cam has agreed for April 16th and 30th are not debates.
Yes, it seems like Cameron has agreed to attend the first debate, and in addition two other events, but has not agreed to the second and third debates. I suspect the second and third debates will still go ahead without him. So we may well get a separate event with Cameron preceding a debate with everyone else on the 16th and the 30th.
There are no second and third debates under the new proposals, the second debate is a Challenger debate and the third is a programme with DC EM and NC. DC and NC have accepted the new proposals
Do you have a source for this? I do not see how they could get away with such proposals, as UKIP would have grounds to challenge it. They have been recognized as a major party by Ofcom, so would surely need to be included in the third programme rather than as a challenger.
@kle4 How do you win when you look like a petulant child who stamps his foot and refuses to take part, then demands everyone else can come and play but with his rules?
@Eastwinger And Cam gets to dictate terms to the lesser mortals? That is going to look good for a Prime Minister who is rumoured to be aloof and out of touch.
Get real, the broadcasters aren't stupid. They know that they don't have much of a program without the PM being included. They obviously have to compromise to get any kind of a show for the viewers.
I can understand why Labour aren't happy about it but they are not the ones holding the cards.
@Eastwinger And Cam gets to dictate terms to the lesser mortals? That is going to look good for a Prime Minister who is rumoured to be aloof and out of touch.
Get real, the broadcasters aren't stupid. They know that they don't have much of a program without the PM being included. They obviously have to compromise to get any kind of a show for the viewers.
I can understand why Labour aren't happy about it but they are not the ones holding the cards.
Our elections aint that scumbag Cameron's toy!
I wanted the earlier debate proposals too, but the debates aren't the elections, so I'm less mad about the debates being treated like a toy. Each side wants the best version for themselves. If Cameron wins, he wins. not big deal, just less entertainment.
I just want them controlled by the appropriate authorities who are Ofcom and the Electoral Commission. They should set the criteria for who can be included in the debates. If its major party's then fine then its major parties. If its not then it should not be this ridiculous Pick n' Mix at the behest of our high and mighty prime Minister!
At the end of the day the integrity of our political system is far more important than any of the wretched political parties or god awful TV stations none of who are capable of giving balanced informed political coverage anyway.
What you are looking at folks is desperate damage limitation, and no one is going to help Dave off the hook. (and that includes Clegg, unless he wants to deliver the coup de gras to his former party)
@Eastwinger And Cam gets to dictate terms to the lesser mortals? That is going to look good for a Prime Minister who is rumoured to be aloof and out of touch.
Get real, the broadcasters aren't stupid. They know that they don't have much of a program without the PM being included. They obviously have to compromise to get any kind of a show for the viewers.
I can understand why Labour aren't happy about it but they are not the ones holding the cards.
What you are looking at folks is desperate damage limitation, and no one is going to help Dave off the hook. (and that includes Clegg, unless he wants to deliver the coup de gras to his former party)
@Sean_F I am not going to disagree about the polls being close, just that a sudden jump after a change in methodology should at least raise an eyebrow.
@Eastwinger And Cam gets to dictate terms to the lesser mortals? That is going to look good for a Prime Minister who is rumoured to be aloof and out of touch.
Get real, the broadcasters aren't stupid. They know that they don't have much of a program without the PM being included. They obviously have to compromise to get any kind of a show for the viewers.
I can understand why Labour aren't happy about it but they are not the ones holding the cards.
Our elections aint that scumbag Cameron's toy!
Neither are they Labour's or the BBC's.
Which if you had seen my other posts is why I have said all along that it should be Ofcom and the Electoral Commission who should set the criteria for who gets invited to the debates. That said sections 6.9, 6.10 and 6.13 of Ofcom's current rules would pretty much cover it and ensure scumbag Prime Ministers keep their self serving oars out of it.
@Hengists_Gift You mean setting the rules out clearly would be a smart idea? But when Ed proposed it, we got pages of drool about people being sent to gulags for non attendance?
@kle4 How do you win when you look like a petulant child who stamps his foot and refuses to take part, then demands everyone else can come and play but with his rules?
He 'wins' if he can get the format he thinks advantages him the most, and then is proven correct. It may well be he can get the format he likes but he has miscalculated how it will advantage him (due to among other things the petulance) and so is proven incorrect (I for one think he should have accepted the second offer made, it seemed to fit his aims well), and therefore will not 'win'.
Nevertheless, I fail to see the point in whinging about Cameron's petulance. My problem with it has been a)it could have robbed me of what I see as the most entertaining spectacle, and b) it was unclear what additional advantage he felt could be gained through that petulance and so just seemed silly.
I've never actually had a problem with him or any of the party leaders trying to maneuver the most advantageous position for themselves though. That's what parties do. Cameron has been the most vocal in this instance, but I am sure no-one will pretend other parties and their leaders do not do the same. Therefore, his demanding everyone play by his rules is not an egregious problem, especially as if the broadcasters do end up agreeing to his terms, it makes his demands look more reasonable than they were, at least to some people.
It could lead to some blowback - and I think it should, as his position on this has been thoroughly disingenuous - but I don't think Cameron's engaging in partisan political behaviour is the uniquely terrible thing you seem to imagine it is because you dislike him, which must have a negative impact.
@chrisshipitvNo10: Broadcasters made this offer on Saturday. I understand Labour WERE made aware of this plan on Sunday #tvdebates
But it took them until today to realise that they had been shafted.
Give them a break, Ed been investigating just where his food appears from at home....since the room he thought was his kitchen, might not be.
Or maybe he has been very busy commending the Mirror over their industrial scale hacking of phones and exploring how a Labour government would set up an investigation into this matter?
@GIN1138 This one isn't grumpy, in fact, quite the opposite. Spin it how you like, it is a c8ck up from Dave, and he is now looking for a get out clause.
With earlier proposals lefties mocked those on the right who were defending Cameron's stance.
With this proposal those on the right are mocking those on the left who are criticising Cameron's stance seemingly working out for him.
Can't we compromise? Like I said, I still think Cameron's stance was phoney and more to the point silly, but if he has managed to get the broadcasters on side, it doesn't prevent criticism of that stance or that it will work out for him - just that the political gamesmanship will have worked out on this occasion. (still an if at this stage)
With earlier proposals lefties mocked those on the right who were defending Cameron's stance.
With this proposal those on the right are mocking those on the left who are criticising Cameron's stance seemingly working out for him.
Can't we compromise? Like I said, I still think Cameron's stance was phoney and more to the point silly, but if he has managed to get the broadcasters on side, it doesn't prevent criticism of that stance or that it will work out for him - just that the political gamesmanship will have worked out on this occasion. (still an if at this stage)
@Hengists_Gift You mean setting the rules out clearly would be a smart idea? But when Ed proposed it, we got pages of drool about people being sent to gulags for non attendance?
The problem with Miliband is he turns a simple task into a freaking bureacracy version of War & Peace. I dread to think how big the quangocracy will grow under him because every proposal has another bloody enquiry and another quango identified in it! All this needs is one additional rule in the Ofcom rules
"If TV companies propose political debates during the election period then the guidelines set out in sections 6.9, 6.10 & 6.13 will apply to each and every debate."
@paulwaugh: At last! Broadcasters statement: 'We welcome David Cameron’s willingness to participate in the first TV debate on April 2nd...'
@paulwaugh: But add: "The broadcasters are continuing to work with all political parties on progs scheduled for March 26, April 16 and April 30"
They offered it to Cameron, who agreed it and announced it.
I better get that empty chair with Cameron written in big letters on the front back out of the garage.
So it sounds like little has changed. The broadcasters are still planning three debates, Cameron has agreed to the first one, and will have to decide whether he will turn up or not for the second and third.
It seems like the second one can just go ahead with the other six parties. The third debate is more questionable, as the broadcasters will be unable to go ahead with just Miliband. The most likely outcome is the broadcasters extending an invite to Clegg and Farage for that debate. That will be very dangerous for David Cameron, as a Clegg, Farage and Miliband final debate may well be seen as the main event.
The proposals to which Cam has agreed for April 16th and 30th are not debates.
Yes, it seems like Cameron has agreed to attend the first debate, and in addition two other events, but has not agreed to the second and third debates. I suspect the second and third debates will still go ahead without him. So we may well get a separate event with Cameron preceding a debate with everyone else on the 16th and the 30th.
There are no second and third debates under the new proposals, the second debate is a Challenger debate and the third is a programme with DC EM and NC. DC and NC have accepted the new proposals
Do you have a source for this? I do not see how they could get away with such proposals, as UKIP would have grounds to challenge it. They have been recognized as a major party by Ofcom, so would surely need to be included in the third programme rather than as a challenger.
Various sources not least Political Betting. Seems offer was made to David Cameron on Saturday who announced that he had accepted. It is the broadcasters who made the offer.
@GIN1138 This one isn't grumpy, in fact, quite the opposite. Spin it how you like, it is a c8ck up from Dave, and he is now looking for a get out clause.
Hmm, I wouldn't call it a cock up exactly. Personally I think Cameron has played this whole thing wrong from the beginning, and even if he gets what he now wants, it will not be as good as what he could have had if he played ball, but that's him aiming for the wrong goal, getting what he wanted but it not working, not him cocking up, which would be him not getting what he wanted.
You will call that spin despite me not being a conservative, because that's a standard reaction on here, but I do think there is a distinction between being wrong but getting what you want, and not getting what you want and needing to get out of it.
@TheWatcher Do those who pay Dave for a "cosy country supper" get a discount if it is held in his second kitchen? And has Dave finally worked out how many homes he owns?
@GIN1138 This one isn't grumpy, in fact, quite the opposite. Spin it how you like, it is a c8ck up from Dave, and he is now looking for a get out clause.
If anyone has 'cocked up' it is the broadcasters and the winners are David Cameron, Nick Clegg and ITV
Either Cameron has played a humdinger, or the broadcasters have called his bluff. Wonder if Miliband will keep harping on about the lack of the head-to-head debate? Seems like he wasn't expecting Cameron to agree to any debate proposal.
With earlier proposals lefties mocked those on the right who were defending Cameron's stance.
With this proposal those on the right are mocking those on the left who are criticising Cameron's stance seemingly working out for him.
Can't we compromise? Like I said, I still think Cameron's stance was phoney and more to the point silly, but if he has managed to get the broadcasters on side, it doesn't prevent criticism of that stance or that it will work out for him - just that the political gamesmanship will have worked out on this occasion. (still an if at this stage)
Politics is a dirty old game.
wishing it were different won't make it so.
I don't mind it being a dirty game - it's the lack of self-awareness about the dirtiness pervading all sides (to one degree or another, inasmuch as political behaviours are non-partisan), and the self righteousness, that grinds.
I save my self-righteousness for myself, not political parties which certainly do not deserve the reaction, nor can defend it, thank you very much!
Miliband 'won't sanction single debate' Posted at 19:55
Ed Miliband has said he won't sanction a single debate on 2 April between 7-party leaders. He says there is no new offer from the broadcasters. The Labour leader is urging the prime minister to sign up to the original plan.
Ed Miliband has said he won't sanction a single debate on 2 April between 7-party leaders. He says there is no new offer from the broadcasters. The Labour leader is urging the prime minister to sign up to the original plan.
@GIN1138 This one isn't grumpy, in fact, quite the opposite. Spin it how you like, it is a c8ck up from Dave, and he is now looking for a get out clause.
If anyone has 'cocked up' it is the broadcasters
Hard to argue with. Being seemingly firm at times, less so at others, it has generated a lot of confusion, allowed the parties to play games with them with ease. I'm still unclear what if anything we'll be getting, and while the politicians (Cameron first and foremost) are responsible for messing things around, I don't blame politicians for acting like politicians in doing so, whereas the broadcasters being unable to figure something out is unfortunate.
Miliband 'won't sanction single debate' Posted at 19:55
Ed Miliband has said he won't sanction a single debate on 2 April between 7-party leaders. He says there is no new offer from the broadcasters. The Labour leader is urging the prime minister to sign up to the original plan.
So we now have Ed Miliband killing the debate - you couldn't make this up
Ed Miliband has said he won't sanction a single debate on 2 April between 7-party leaders. He says there is no new offer from the broadcasters. The Labour leader is urging the prime minister to sign up to the original plan.
Ed Miliband has said he won't sanction a single debate on 2 April between 7-party leaders. He says there is no new offer from the broadcasters. The Labour leader is urging the prime minister to sign up to the original plan.
Running scared
Are we really talking about an 'empty chair' for Ed then
Either Cameron has played a humdinger, or the broadcasters have called his bluff. Wonder if Miliband will keep harping on about the lack of the head-to-head debate? Seems like he wasn't expecting Cameron to agree to any debate proposal.
He's hardly played a humdinger because he has capitulated on the issue of holding the debate within the campaign period. As far as the rest of it goes I really don't see how either the "Challenger's debate" or the question time round robin will pass the smell test. Arguably the Tories , Labour and Libdems have to be invited to (and then decline) the challengers debate because UKIP are invited and vice versa with the round robin (which UKIp presumably would accept).
Frankly the people in the TV companies who have dreamed this abortion up should lose their jobs over it for attempting to manipulate the election campaign!
Just back from the pb drinks where I was chatting amiably for most of the time with ninoinoz. If that's not the most surprising revelation of the night, I must have left too early.
Indeed I thought Dave's ''final word' was that he wouldn't do a debate during the election campaign period. Well guess what he is #can'ttrustawordcameronsays
I'm reading on the BBC that the broadcasters are saying Cameron is being "premature", so maybe it wasn't a formal offer at all.
If it was a formal offer, I really don't see how it holds water. After UKIP are classed as a major party by Ofcom, the BBC can't then downgrade them to a "challenger" after negotiations with the Tories. At a minimum, Farage would have to be added to the one-on-ones.
As the only individual on the site under a permanent banning order from PB functions may I cordially wish all the PBers at the p*ss up my fraternal greetings and hope you all get lost on the way home.
Indeed I thought Dave's ''final word' was that he wouldn't do a debate during the election campaign period. Well guess what he is #can'ttrustawordcameronsays
By three days? On Maundy Thursday? It's a win for Cameron unless what he really wanted was for none of the debates to happen at all.
The Tories' first ever lead with TNS in living memory. That just has to be worth a blue bar chart surely, especially with you in charge tonight TSE ..... get it sorted!
I'm reading on the BBC that the broadcasters are saying Cameron is being "premature", so maybe it wasn't a formal offer at all.
If it was a formal offer, I really don't see how it holds water. After UKIP are classed as a major party by Ofcom, the BBC can't then downgrade them to a "challenger" after negotiations with the Tories. At a minimum, Farage would have to be added to the one-on-ones.
ITV announced last night on their 10 o'clock news that the 7 way debate takes place on the 2nd April and Julie Etchingham who will host the programme invited viewers to submit questions. It seems very unlikely she would have done this without being certain that the debate is on.
Arab party now third largest. Could be official opposition, entitled to security briefings by law.
Electoral system
National constituency, closed lists. Hare quota + D'Hondt. 3.25% threshold. Apparentment permitted.
Likud has 27 but Otzma/Yahad (fascist) didn't make the curt so 4 fewer for Netanyahu. Jewish Home only 8 not 11. Shas down 1. So the Likud bloc is only about 54.
The Herzog bloc is about 53 with the Arab Bloc on 13 holding the balance. Bit like the SNP. They might support Herzog in S&C but definitely not Netanhayu.
ITV announced last night on their 10 o'clock news that the 7 way debate takes place on the 2nd April and Julie Etchingham who will host the programme invited viewers to submit questions. It seems very unlikely she would have done this without being certain that the debate is on.
The Tories' first ever lead with TNS in living memory. That just has to be worth a blue bar chart surely, especially with you in charge tonight TSE ..... get it sorted!
Indeed I thought Dave's ''final word' was that he wouldn't do a debate during the election campaign period. Well guess what he is #can'ttrustawordcameronsays
By three days? On Maundy Thursday? It's a win for Cameron unless what he really wanted was for none of the debates to happen at all.
Well its only a win if he comes out of it ahead and given hows he and the TV companies have stitched the other parties up I think that is even less likely now than it was if he had not acted like a tw@ for the last 6 months.
Arab party now third largest. Could be official opposition, entitled to security briefings by law.
Electoral system
National constituency, closed lists. Hare quota + D'Hondt. 3.25% threshold. Apparentment permitted.
Likud has 27 but Otzma/Yahad (fascist) didn't make the curt so 4 fewer for Netanyahu. Jewish Home only 8 not 11. Shas down 1. So the Likud bloc is only about 54.
The Herzog bloc is about 53 with the Arab Bloc on 13 holding the balance. Bit like the SNP. They might support Herzog in S&C but definitely not Netanhayu.
Has an arab party ever had that sort of influence on Israeli politics before ?
The Tories' first ever lead with TNS in living memory. That just has to be worth a blue bar chart surely, especially with you in charge tonight TSE ..... get it sorted!
1 smiling Dave, please!
Please not. We are going to have to suffer his miserable visage all over our TV screens even more than usual in the next few weeks anyway......
Arab party now third largest. Could be official opposition, entitled to security briefings by law.
Electoral system
National constituency, closed lists. Hare quota + D'Hondt. 3.25% threshold. Apparentment permitted.
Likud has 27 but Otzma/Yahad (fascist) didn't make the curt so 4 fewer for Netanyahu. Jewish Home only 8 not 11. Shas down 1. So the Likud bloc is only about 54.
The Herzog bloc is about 53 with the Arab Bloc on 13 holding the balance. Bit like the SNP. They might support Herzog in S&C but definitely not Netanhayu.
Has an arab party ever had that sort of influence on Israeli politics before ?
No. Neither has the SNP on UK politics!
I'm listening to http://www.i24news.tv/en/tv/livehome and they are discussing Herzog's weak voice and lack of leadership skills and questioning whether he can lead the left. Its Ed!! And the Arab SNP I believe will come to his rescue.
The commentators don't seem to have mentioned that Yahad (fascist and a Likud ally) has not made the cut and therefor lost 4 seats.
It all hinges on Kulanu (9 seats) but Netanyahu has really upset Kulanu this morning by putting out a false message that Kulanu was commited to Likud. I think Kulanu will go with Herzog. Kulanu is the LibDem of Israeli politics.
Not that Ofsted is any different to the HMIC, IPCC and any other alphabet soup quango with their 'three monkeys' approach to inconvenient facts.
I forecast the same government non-response as they've done regarding the South Yorkshire plods.
Twenty nine weeks after the Jay report the number of plods, social workers, children's home managers, councillors and council officials remains at zero.
I hope nobody is expecting imminent arrests involving the Westminster paedophile abuse and cover up.
Arab party now third largest. Could be official opposition, entitled to security briefings by law.
Electoral system
National constituency, closed lists. Hare quota + D'Hondt. 3.25% threshold. Apparentment permitted.
Likud has 27 but Otzma/Yahad (fascist) didn't make the curt so 4 fewer for Netanyahu. Jewish Home only 8 not 11. Shas down 1. So the Likud bloc is only about 54.
The Herzog bloc is about 53 with the Arab Bloc on 13 holding the balance. Bit like the SNP. They might support Herzog in S&C but definitely not Netanhayu.
Has an arab party ever had that sort of influence on Israeli politics before ?
It all hinges on Kulanu (9 seats) but Netanyahu has really upset Kulanu this morning by putting out a false message that Kulanu was commited to Likud. I think Kulanu will go with Herzog. Kulanu is the LibDem of Israeli politics.
Do they produce imaginative bar (mitzvah) charts ?
(Likud) Netanyahu = Cameron (Zionist Union) Herzog = Miliband Joint Arab = SNP (won't play with Netanyahu) Kulanu = LibDem (will play with either of them as long as there is a place in cabinet)
No obvious stable coalition. But they have a defined formal process for creating a coalition which might be instructive.
Arab party now third largest. Could be official opposition, entitled to security briefings by law.
Electoral system
National constituency, closed lists. Hare quota + D'Hondt. 3.25% threshold. Apparentment permitted.
Likud has 27 but Otzma/Yahad (fascist) didn't make the curt so 4 fewer for Netanyahu. Jewish Home only 8 not 11. Shas down 1. So the Likud bloc is only about 54.
The Herzog bloc is about 53 with the Arab Bloc on 13 holding the balance. Bit like the SNP. They might support Herzog in S&C but definitely not Netanhayu.
Has an arab party ever had that sort of influence on Israeli politics before ?
No. Neither has the SNP on UK politics!
I'm listening to http://www.i24news.tv/en/tv/livehome and they are discussing Herzog's weak voice and lack of leadership skills and questioning whether he can lead the left. Its Ed!! And the Arab SNP I believe will come to his rescue.
The commentators don't seem to have mentioned that Yahad (fascist and a Likud ally) has not made the cut and therefor lost 4 seats.
It all hinges on Kulanu (9 seats) but Netanyahu has really upset Kulanu this morning by putting out a false message that Kulanu was commited to Likud. I think Kulanu will go with Herzog. Kulanu is the LibDem of Israeli politics.
Surprising to see all the Tories on here talking about the debates but almost no mention of another Ashcroft marginals poll that shows next to no progress. Still looks like 50 Tory seats will become Labour ones.
Surprising to see all the Tories on here talking about the debates but almost no mention of another Ashcroft marginals poll that shows next to no progress. Still looks like 50 Tory seats will become Labour ones.
Surprising to see all the Tories on here talking about the debates but almost no mention of another Ashcroft marginals poll that shows next to no progress. Still looks like 50 Tory seats will become Labour ones.
The marginals poll was released more than nine hours ago. It was talked about earlier...
Surprising to see all the Tories on here talking about the debates but almost no mention of another Ashcroft marginals poll that shows next to no progress. Still looks like 50 Tory seats will become Labour ones.
Indeed it says much to the Tories lot that they consider Cameron acquiescing to something he really didn't want to do as something to celebrate
Surprising to see all the Tories on here talking about the debates but almost no mention of another Ashcroft marginals poll that shows next to no progress. Still looks like 50 Tory seats will become Labour ones.
Arab party now third largest. Could be official opposition, entitled to security briefings by law.
Electoral system
National constituency, closed lists. Hare quota + D'Hondt. 3.25% threshold. Apparentment permitted.
Likud has 27 but Otzma/Yahad (fascist) didn't make the curt so 4 fewer for Netanyahu. Jewish Home only 8 not 11. Shas down 1. So the Likud bloc is only about 54.
The Herzog bloc is about 53 with the Arab Bloc on 13 holding the balance. Bit like the SNP. They might support Herzog in S&C but definitely not Netanhayu.
Has an arab party ever had that sort of influence on Israeli politics before ?
It all hinges on Kulanu (9 seats) but Netanyahu has really upset Kulanu this morning by putting out a false message that Kulanu was commited to Likud. I think Kulanu will go with Herzog. Kulanu is the LibDem of Israeli politics.
Do they produce imaginative bar (mitzvah) charts ?
Surprising to see all the Tories on here talking about the debates but almost no mention of another Ashcroft marginals poll that shows next to no progress. Still looks like 50 Tory seats will become Labour ones.
Arab party now third largest. Could be official opposition, entitled to security briefings by law.
Electoral system
National constituency, closed lists. Hare quota + D'Hondt. 3.25% threshold. Apparentment permitted.
Likud has 27 but Otzma/Yahad (fascist) didn't make the curt so 4 fewer for Netanyahu. Jewish Home only 8 not 11. Shas down 1. So the Likud bloc is only about 54.
The Herzog bloc is about 53 with the Arab Bloc on 13 holding the balance. Bit like the SNP. They might support Herzog in S&C but definitely not Netanhayu.
Has an arab party ever had that sort of influence on Israeli politics before ?
It all hinges on Kulanu (9 seats) but Netanyahu has really upset Kulanu this morning by putting out a false message that Kulanu was commited to Likud. I think Kulanu will go with Herzog. Kulanu is the LibDem of Israeli politics.
Do they produce imaginative bar (mitzvah) charts ?
You're in very good form this evening Jack.
I'm finishing off a very fine bottle of madeira ....
Surprising to see all the Tories on here talking about the debates but almost no mention of another Ashcroft marginals poll that shows next to no progress. Still looks like 50 Tory seats will become Labour ones.
They were awful - Ed on course for 300 seats in England.
Suggesting Kulanu is the Lib Dems of Israeli politics in any sense other than they can be power brokers is a leap. Its running on a socially liberal ticket but its headed by a former Likud man, Moshe Kachlon and its view on the national and security issue is hawkish.
As it is, Bibi has been on the phone with Natali Bennett (who looks onboard already with posts decided) & Moshe Kachlon already on the assumption he has that one more seat than the centre left Zionist Union. .
There is, however, talk in Israel is on a Unity government between the two largest parties. Sounds a stretch to us here but in Israel they do deal politics though Bibi seems to be looking to avoid that right now.
Comments
Yes dear, of course.
How do you win when you look like a petulant child who stamps his foot and refuses to take part, then demands everyone else can come and play but with his rules?
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-31931203
At the end of the day the integrity of our political system is far more important than any of the wretched political parties or god awful TV stations none of who are capable of giving balanced informed political coverage anyway.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2999330/PIERS-MORGAN-Greedy-ghastly-lying-fantasist-just-Heather-Mills-good-points-gives-laugh.html
Crickey Piers...talk about walking on egg shells...
Leveson inquiry: former model says she never authorised Morgan or anyone else to access messages left by former husband Sir Paul McCartney
http://www.theguardian.com/media/2012/feb/09/leveson-inquiry-heather-mills-voicemail
'All the TV stations should be severely censured for this. TV ststions must not be allowed to hijack election campaigns again!'
Ed will be along in a minute proposing full state control, yet another bandwagon to jump on.
Is it any surprise the broadcasters are dancing to the tune of a coward.
(and that includes Clegg, unless he wants to deliver the coup de gras to his former party)
But, if we assume the true position is a tie, right now, pollsters have all converged back to it, recently.
Ed. Outplayed, now looking for a way out
I guess the PB lefties must be really upset at Dave once more pulling a flanker re the debate because they are miscalling him this evening.
I understand Labour WERE made aware of this plan on Sunday
#tvdebates
I am not going to disagree about the polls being close, just that a sudden jump after a change in methodology should at least raise an eyebrow.
Labour’s ‘Martin Taylor’ question: Who is Miliband’s £600k donor?
http://www.thebureauinvestigates.com/2015/03/17/labours-donor-who-is-martin-taylor-ed-miliband-transparency/
I hope we haven't got a situation again where some blokes cleaner, secretary, driver, have donated without their knowledge.
But it took them until today to realise that they had been shafted.
You mean setting the rules out clearly would be a smart idea?
But when Ed proposed it, we got pages of drool about people being sent to gulags for non attendance?
#toysoutofthepram
Nevertheless, I fail to see the point in whinging about Cameron's petulance. My problem with it has been a)it could have robbed me of what I see as the most entertaining spectacle, and b) it was unclear what additional advantage he felt could be gained through that petulance and so just seemed silly.
I've never actually had a problem with him or any of the party leaders trying to maneuver the most advantageous position for themselves though. That's what parties do. Cameron has been the most vocal in this instance, but I am sure no-one will pretend other parties and their leaders do not do the same. Therefore, his demanding everyone play by his rules is not an egregious problem, especially as if the broadcasters do end up agreeing to his terms, it makes his demands look more reasonable than they were, at least to some people.
It could lead to some blowback - and I think it should, as his position on this has been thoroughly disingenuous - but I don't think Cameron's engaging in partisan political behaviour is the uniquely terrible thing you seem to imagine it is because you dislike him, which must have a negative impact.
Or maybe he has been very busy commending the Mirror over their industrial scale hacking of phones and exploring how a Labour government would set up an investigation into this matter?
This one isn't grumpy, in fact, quite the opposite.
Spin it how you like, it is a c8ck up from Dave, and he is now looking for a get out clause.
With this proposal those on the right are mocking those on the left who are criticising Cameron's stance seemingly working out for him.
Can't we compromise? Like I said, I still think Cameron's stance was phoney and more to the point silly, but if he has managed to get the broadcasters on side, it doesn't prevent criticism of that stance or that it will work out for him - just that the political gamesmanship will have worked out on this occasion. (still an if at this stage)
It could raise the bar for a Majority on May 8th to 324 or 325.
wishing it were different won't make it so.
A coalition with the Irish, or just supply and confidence?
Perhaps Dave needs to spell his position out?
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/scotland/11478793/MSPs-vote-to-make-Nicola-Sturgeon-highest-paid-politician.html
"If TV companies propose political debates during the election period then the guidelines set out in sections 6.9, 6.10 & 6.13 will apply to each and every debate."
Or something similar. Job done!
You will call that spin despite me not being a conservative, because that's a standard reaction on here, but I do think there is a distinction between being wrong but getting what you want, and not getting what you want and needing to get out of it.
Do those who pay Dave for a "cosy country supper" get a discount if it is held in his second kitchen?
And has Dave finally worked out how many homes he owns?
If you say so.
I think this could be a game-changer with the Joint Arab Party playing the role of the SNP with a supply and confidence arrangement..
I save my self-righteousness for myself, not political parties which certainly do not deserve the reaction, nor can defend it, thank you very much!
oh
Miliband 'won't sanction single debate'
Posted at 19:55
Ed Miliband has said he won't sanction a single debate on 2 April between 7-party leaders. He says there is no new offer from the broadcasters. The Labour leader is urging the prime minister to sign up to the original plan.
Since Dave gave his final word on the matter last week, he "would" be a bit surprised I suppose.
Arab party now third largest. Could be official opposition, entitled to security briefings by law.
Electoral system
National constituency, closed lists. Hare quota + D'Hondt. 3.25% threshold. Apparentment permitted.
Yes, Irish politics needs to look at itself.
http://cameronscorkers.org/
Frankly the people in the TV companies who have dreamed this abortion up should lose their jobs over it for attempting to manipulate the election campaign!
I'm reading on the BBC that the broadcasters are saying Cameron is being "premature", so maybe it wasn't a formal offer at all.
If it was a formal offer, I really don't see how it holds water. After UKIP are classed as a major party by Ofcom, the BBC can't then downgrade them to a "challenger" after negotiations with the Tories. At a minimum, Farage would have to be added to the one-on-ones.
It's a PB tradition.
It will be Monday or Tuesday by the time we get a semblance of clarity, which doesn't leave a lot of time for details?
The Herzog bloc is about 53 with the Arab Bloc on 13 holding the balance. Bit like the SNP. They might support Herzog in S&C but definitely not Netanhayu.
Cameron agreed to the new format.
Now Ed is wriggling
'So we now have Ed Miliband killing the debate - you couldn't make this up'
So Ed the coward now chickening out of debates.
I'm listening to http://www.i24news.tv/en/tv/livehome and they are discussing Herzog's weak voice and lack of leadership skills and questioning whether he can lead the left. Its Ed!! And the Arab SNP I believe will come to his rescue.
The commentators don't seem to have mentioned that Yahad (fascist and a Likud ally) has not made the cut and therefor lost 4 seats.
It all hinges on Kulanu (9 seats) but Netanyahu has really upset Kulanu this morning by putting out a false message that Kulanu was commited to Likud. I think Kulanu will go with Herzog. Kulanu is the LibDem of Israeli politics.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-south-yorkshire-31914195
Not that Ofsted is any different to the HMIC, IPCC and any other alphabet soup quango with their 'three monkeys' approach to inconvenient facts.
I forecast the same government non-response as they've done regarding the South Yorkshire plods.
Twenty nine weeks after the Jay report the number of plods, social workers, children's home managers, councillors and council officials remains at zero.
I hope nobody is expecting imminent arrests involving the Westminster paedophile abuse and cover up.
Three in the West Midlands but none in the East Midlands.
Two in the North-West but none in Yorkshire.
One in the South-West but none in the East.
Not a good geographical spread.
Which is important because I think Labour are doing better in the western half of England and the Conservatives and UKIP better in the eastern half.
http://www.votes20.gov.il/
Click right for translate.
It is a dummy run for the UK election.
(Likud) Netanyahu = Cameron
(Zionist Union) Herzog = Miliband
Joint Arab = SNP (won't play with Netanyahu)
Kulanu = LibDem (will play with either of them as long as there is a place in cabinet)
No obvious stable coalition.
But they have a defined formal process for creating a coalition which might be instructive.
www.votes20.gov.il/nationalresults
R/mouse click to translate to English - currently it's ZU, Likud, J Home, Yesh, Kulanu, Meretz, Joint List.
High JH score suggests maybe a lot of results in from the West Bank settlements?
Kulanu leader Kahlon has said he will wait for final results, offer support to largest party, so not dissimilar to Clegg in UK 2010.
Thanks
DC
http://translate.google.co.uk/translate?hl=en&sl=iw&u=http://www.votes20.gov.il/&prev=search
Bad in the NW (true to this parliament's form), good in Worcester. The rest broadly in line with the nationals.
One of my many guilty pleasures.
As it is, Bibi has been on the phone with Natali Bennett (who looks onboard already with posts decided) & Moshe Kachlon already on the assumption he has that one more seat than the centre left Zionist Union. .
There is, however, talk in Israel is on a Unity government between the two largest parties. Sounds a stretch to us here but in Israel they do deal politics though Bibi seems to be looking to avoid that right now.