Yesterday the broadcasters unveiled a proposal for televised leaders’ debates that fails basic tests of fairness and balance.
Yesterday the broadcasters unveiled a proposal for televised leaders’ debates that fails basic tests of fairness and balance
So this is what British politics on TV in the twenty-first century is supposed to look like? Four middle-aged white men arguing over whose turn it is to rearrange the deckchairs as the Titanic sinks?
Whatever qualities David Cameron, Ed Miliband, Nick Clegg and Nigel Farage may have, the public does not think they represent the diversity of modern Britain. It does journalism a disservice to pretend that they do – the public are not fools.
We can either have a real debate, with all strands of political opinion represented, or we can have another establishment charade that will see the public turning off in droves.
Yesterday the broadcasters unveiled a ludicrous proposal for televised leaders’ debates that fails basic tests of fairness and balance. The so-called 2-3-4 format allows different shades of the British establishment free airtime while excluding those who disagree with their politics of austerity. It is neither a reflection of modern Britain nor an aid to the free and fair elections that twenty-first century democracy demands.
The Green Party has to be in there, if for no other reason than to show that there is a genuine choice on offer in this election. You can either plump for business-as-usual, as expressed through the Conservatives, Liberal Democrats, Labour or UKIP, or you can vote for the real change that we offer.
Whether it’s a £10 minimum wage, keeping the NHS in public hands, bringing the railways back into public ownership or stopping runaway climate change – the Greens offer a distinctive voice that millions of Britons support.
We’ve also earned our right to sit at the top table the hard way – by building up our membership and staying true to our values. We’re not funded by tax-dodging millionaires and we never will be.
Voters increasingly recognise that the Green Party is different. Our policies are made by our members, not by focus groups or newspaper tycoons. We campaign for what is right and fair, not what is easy or fleetingly popular. We aren’t afraid to stand up to the mighty and the powerful and we aren’t embarrassed to speak out on behalf of those whose voices have been stifled.
On any objective test the Green Party should be in the leaders’ debates. UKIP has had an MP for about five minutes; by May 2015 we’ll have had Caroline Lucas in the House of Commons for five years. The Lib Dems are slated for two debates yet we comprehensively beat them in the European Elections this May – winning three times as many seats and 150,000 more votes. General Election opinion polls put us neck-and-neck with the junior Coalition partners. And when the public get to hear about Green policies they prefer them to the alternatives.
So broadcasters can keep moving the goalposts to shut us out but we are not going to go away.
Since they published their proposals yesterday there has been an explosion of public support for us. Whether natural Green voters or not, people do not like the idea of closing down discussion and debate. With traditional party loyalties fragmenting at an unprecedented rate the electorate want to see the full range of views on offer.
We live in an era of multi-party politics. The broadcasters need to accept that or get out of the way.
Natalie Bennett is leader of the Green Party
Sign the petition to include the Green Party in the TV leaders’ debates
29 Responses to “On any objective test the Green Party should be in the leaders’ debates”
Selohesra
Why not two debates – one with the two potential PMs Ed & Dave and a second with UKIP/Greens/Nats/Libs ie potential coalition partners at best. Perhaps second group should have two debates as share of time will be less than first debate where they both get ~ 50% each
David Lindsay
We only ever have these things in Britain because “they have them in America”, a non-argument advanced in all sorts of causes by people who think that it is unanswerable, rather than merely unworthy of a response.
Look what has been done to our foreign policy. Look what is being done to our NHS.
With the re-election of the incumbent at Clacton, the only candidate with whom UKIP could have won the seat, there are now 12 parties in the House of Commons, of which three have precisely one seat apiece.
One of those three outpolled the Liberal Democrats at this year’s European Elections, while one of the other nine has more members than the Lib Dems (and far more than UKIP).
Not only would the necessary debates with six participants on each side of the moderator last for four, five or six hours, but they would look like the Last Supper, at least as depicted by Leonardo da Vinci.
The last experiment of this kind gave this country a hung Parliament, and thus The Orange Book as the basis of the most viciously right-wing government since the War, a government for which nobody had voted.
Never again.
swat
Sorry to say, but Natlaie will go down like a lead balloon because of her Aussie accent; she’ll put more potential voters off than put them on the Green list.
But its good to see at least one woman in the debates. And one moderator Julie Etchingham.
Very few are going to say I agree with Ed, who is not that good at communicating down the Tube like Nick was. Its
Foullaini
We only need one debate, UKIP vs Greens.
Nigel and that annoying Aussie bird embody the two opposing philosophies battling it out in this country, the rest of them just steal their clothes as they can.
littleoddsandpieces
The Greens do not realise that they have a whole swathe of policies now that help the over 50s, the most prolific voters.
As over half of over 50s are within the working poor and unemployed, and the majority reason not in work is due to being disabled / chronic sick, then these are millions of voters for The Greens, if they but grouped their policies and promoted them that are issues of interest to that age group.
In amongst the over 50s, are the huge number of women who are early retied in lieu of redundancy due to the over million austerity job cuts in the public sector done or due. The average women’s public sector works pensions is between £2,000 and £5,000 a year, so far below any living income.
The Greens offer a universal Citizen Income, non-withdrawable, that will be at the rate of the basic income tax.
Nowhere in their policies can I see if someone early retired and below the raised retirement age, will get a pro rata Citizen Income, as that is described only as a replacement for most benefits.
Because the Citizen Income is listed by The Greens’ policy as dealing with the basic income tax allowance and all income above that will be liable to income tax, so pushing a small works pension into being taxed into nothing.
That is unless the basic tax allowance is raised well above the other parties’ offering of £12,500 a year and above.
Someone living at home has the cost most of the year of heating their home all day. People over 70 need one room heated to 70F all day as cannot generate their own body heat.
The raised retirement age is moral theft of state pension payout because the ring fenced National Insurance Fund has been full for decades, not needing a top up from tax. As the NI Fund is not a tax, it cannot be used by government for general expenditure.
https://you.38degrees.org.uk/petitions/state-pension-at-60-now
The Greens say the National Insurance Fund will end and the state pension will be funded by tax. But there is no mention of bringing back the 1975 Labour that guaranteed pension payout, which the Tories abolished in 1993, and Labour did not bring back in 13 years of rule.
If Ms Natalie Bennett answered these queries, there would not need to be a televised debate, as The Greens would have passed Labour and UKIP combined already.