…of all time.
I’ll be blogging as it goes right here. Watch the debate itself on ITV1.
Prior to the debate, I shall be watching Scrubs on Paramount Comedy, during the debate, I’ll try to keep on top of comments.
Wondering by whom the debate will have been “brought to us”.
For future reference, AS = Alistair Stewart, GB = Gordon Brown, DC = David Cameron and NC = Nick Clegg.
You can comment directly to the debate at http://itv.com/electiondebate
NC first statement: There is an alternative to the other two “old” parties – to create the fair country we all want.
GB’s mic not fully faded in to start, focuses on the economy, “this is the defining year”, “we can have everybody better off”. Pink tie!
DC thinks the debate is “great”. Wants to restore trust in politics. Playing the expenses card. DC by far lightest on substance in opening statement “not all Labour has done is wrong, they have done some good things and I would keep them”
Immigration: GB “want to control and manage immigration” No unskilled worker can come now. Trying to use plenty of Blairite hand movements.
NC making notes while GB speaks – error?
DC says immigration is too high, so much for being the true liberal eh Dave?
DC wants an absolute limit.
NC wants a fair, workable system – the opposite to what we have now. Need to restore exit controls to know who is going out as well as coming in. Wants to add requirement that immigrants only go to a region where their skills are needed.
DC also making notes – can’t tell yet if GB is while others are speaking.
GB uses ‘less’ when he should have said ‘fewer’ – error.
DC says if we don’t cap immigration, we let down immigrant communities and wants a dedicated border police force.
NC points out that there is good immigration as well as bad immigration – some health services understaffed because they’re not allowed to employ from outside EU.
DC: we have benefited from immigration but it’s got out of control.
GB doesn’t like these words – net inward immigration is falling.
NC benefiting from GB and DC laying into each other.
What’s interesting is that – unlike US presidential debates – this is actually a debate prompted by audience questions.
DC to NC: How does that work? NC: You make it work, they do in other countries! (Zing!)
On to crime: Making our towns safer.
DC: The current system doesn’t work, sentences too lenient and too much paperwork, if you go into someone else’s house, you go to prison for a long time!
NC: More police on the streets. Scrap ID Cards – a waste of money – could put 3,000 officers on the street. Too many young offenders start low-level, become hardened. Need to stop that, references Sheffield.
GB: Crime is falling but people don’t feel safe. Need effective policing – record numbers already. Parents need to take responsibility for their children (legally too). The right to take an injunction against the police if they don’t sort things.
DC: Need to get addicts into treatment (note, treatment not enforcement).
NC: Tough talk has created the current situation as prisons have become colleges of crime. Need a different approach, restorative justice. Change people’s behaviour.
GB agrees with NC.
NC again points out that talking tough is fine but that the evidence is that it doesn’t work.
First Ashcroft reference at 26 minutes from GB.
DC turns the debate to money, AS turns it to GB, NC being left as the outsider at the moment.
NC butts in to point out that neither of the others have set out figures while LibDems have set out how to pay for everything.
DC responds by saying that short sentences can work with repeat low level offenders, GB says “that’s why we did it” basically.
DC’s response actually bore no resemblance to what NC said.
Expenses.
NC: No politician deserves trust until all have come clean about what went wrong.
There are still people who have not taken responsibility for (eg) flipping houses. MPs have avoided capital gains tax. The big abuses, some £100,000s (no LibDems) have gone unpunished.
GB: Shocked and sickened. The bankers were irresponsible, so were MPs. No-one who is guilty should be standing. Wants to give right of recalling MPs (so do all others I think now). Right to get issues debated. Reform House of Lords to elected house.
DC: Cut the cost of politics. 10% down in commons, make it better value for money as well as cleaner.
NC: hears the words, they sound great, but you need to “do” as well as “say”. Will give right to sack MP. Proposed it, Labour voted against, Tories abstained. LibDems record is fighting corruption, other parties’ records is avoiding cleaning up.
GB: “agrees” with NC and also wants referendum on new voting system. 50% cut in Lords.
DC: Lords should be “predominantly” elected. Why has the Lords not been done in 13 years of Labour?
DC and GB trying to score points on how much they can cut cost of politics.
AS too enthusiastic in his bringing all 3 into debate.
DC accuses NC of being “holier than thou”
NC draws correlation between 100s of safe Labour and Tory seats and the abuses of the system.
GB: “Nick supports me in reforming the House of Commons and the House of Lords”
NC: “There’s nothing to support”
GB: “You support fundamental reform”
NC: “You haven’t offered any”
All agree on right of reform
GB wants an MP to need 50% of vote
NC points out he’s proposed all this and other parties have voted against it.
Education.
Is Education sacrificed for grades?
GB: Education has improved but need better qualified teachers. Take full time education right through to age 18.
DC wants good external marking of exams.
NC recognises the feeling of jumping through hoops. Need to let heads and teachers actually teach and instil creativity – allow freedom to teach in innovative and creative ways.
GB: Need to ensure high standards.
DC: Need good discipline, 17,000 teachers attacked by pupils each year.
NC: smaller class sizes.
DC wants every available penny to go into schools.
GB says that the Tory cuts put education etc at risk.
DC says stop waste in government and the money can go into schools.
NC: “The more they attack each other, the more they sound exactly the same.”
NC: Need to spend to get smaller class sizes and even 1-to-1. £2.5bn extra.
Budget Deficit.
DC: Vital issue. Got to get economy moving and growing. Save £6bn this year to avoid “jobs tax”. I think he means NI increase.
NC: LibDems are only party to set out how they will actually pay down the deficit. See the back of the manifesto. He is only leader who says that we cannot afford a replacement for Trident. £100bn that we can’t afford.
GB: We have made difficult choices and we are now at a critical point and can’t afford to take £6bn out of the economy.
DC: Need to give up waste. Cut the waste, stop the tax.
NC: As if we can fill the black hole by saving on paperclips and pot plants. LibDems are being straight about a tax that needs to be imposed on the banks to actually raise some money.
NC: Regardless of outcome: Need chancellor, shadows, governor of Bank of England and head of FSA to come together and be honest. Will others support that?
DC ducks it.
GB ducks it too.
GB and DC back on the £6bn argument.
AS moves things along.
Defence.
NC: Troops are underequipped and underpaid. Too many bureaucrats and top-brass. 2 Admirals for every warship! £100bn to replace Trident. Need to change priorities to give proper pay to service men and women also proper body armour, vehicles and equipment.
GB “pride for armed forces” and not a lot else except implicit reference to “it was Blair that sent troops in, not me”
DC: We don’t do enough for service men and women. Had to fight to stop TA funding being cut.
NC: Why do we produce equipment that saves lives in the US army but not use it ourselves?
GB playing the terror threat card to justify Afghan situation.
[missed a few minutes]
NC: Need a complete defence review – likely to happen whoever wins but others want to rule out reviewing the Trident replacement.
DC: Most important duty is to defend country. Should we give up independent nuclear deterrent? Need ultimate protection
GB: Have to deal with Iran and North Korea and can make a difference in overall reductions but can’t favour unilateral abandonment
NC: Can’t justify or afford a missile system designed to flatten St Petersburg and Moscow. We’re not in the Cold War any more and this is a Cold War system.
DC: Need a defence review. Also need more helicopters.
GB: All about Taliban changing tactics.
Onto Health now.
GB summing up what he says Labour have done and giving guarantees for future.
DC thanks the nurse who asked the question for her service and speaks of the help he and his family have received. The NHS budget should grow in real terms every year and wants to develop and expand the NHS. Short term: make cancer drugs available.
NC: Easy to say how much we love and depend on the NHS but how do we protect it when money is tight? Priorities are all wrong – too many managers being appointed when units are threatened with closure. Wants to turn that on its head.
GB: Personal guarantees, 80-90,000 more nurses in the NHS now.
DC: Government has had 13 years to fix the disparity between management growth and front-line growth and it hasn’t. Apparently stopping the NI rise will sort it.
NC: A phony debate: imagining there is tons of money around to spend on the NHS. We all spend £2,000 a year on it via taxes. Tells DC that the idea we can cut the deficit instantly like he says, while also giving massive tax breaks to the rich and increase spending on the NHS is a fantasy.
Final question is on a fairer system for elderly care.
DC: The current system is unfair where people have to spend any money they have saved to pay for their care but can’t afford to make all care free. Put aside £8,000 when you turn 65 and you won’t pay another penny.
NC: One of those rare issues where politicians need to agree an answer that isn’t affected by party politics. Need to work together.
GB: People shouldn’t have to choose between the home they own and the care they need. Get support to receive care in the home.
All seem to agree on regular respite for carers.
NC: No-one has the perfect solution so put people before politics and come together to get an answer.
And that, as they say, is that in terms of the debate.
90 second comments:
NC: There is an alternative to the old parties. Many think all politicians are the same but hopefully he’s showed that’s not true and LibDems can answer the questions and and offer policies. The choice is not just between the old parties, we can be really hopeful about the future with a better, fairer country. Give real change a chance, support fairness.
GB: A great opportunity to exchange ideas. Got to make a decision now about how we secure the recovery this year. Must not make mistakes of the 1980s. Need to be fair to public services as we cut the deficit.
DC: Repeated attemptd to try to frighten you about a Conservative government but choose hope over fear. Need a government with the right values and an understanding that we’re all in it together.
So, what did you think?
