BBC will not allow the Greens on TV debates...as YouGov put the Greens ahead of LDs

barrcode88 · 30/10/14 - 00:39

http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2014/oct/29/bbc-refuses-include-green-party-televised-leader-debates-general-election

They have got some of the Labour and Lib Dem vote.

YouGov/Sun poll:

LAB 34%
CON 31%,
UKIP 17%,
GRNS 7%
LIB DEM 6%

Under Soul · 30/10/14 - 00:59

I genuinely thought that the LD would have at least made up a few % points at this stage in the government. 6% is shocking

jenzie · 30/10/14 - 01:03

they can't refuse

Pat_Smith · 30/10/14 - 02:08

jenzie wrote: »

they can't refuse

Of course they can. And, rightly, they have.

Hypnodisc · 30/10/14 - 03:43

Under Soul wrote: »

I genuinely thought that the LD would have at least made up a few % points at this stage in the government. 6% is shocking

What have they done to keep the liberal vote?

I mean, seriously, who do the Lib Dems think votes for them?

They are toast because they've alienated their own supporters and it's hardly like they're winning new ones with their ever increasingly mix 'n mash rhetoric.

radio4extracrap · 30/10/14 - 06:51

Who is funding the Liberals? They must be happy (not).

bluewomble88 · 30/10/14 - 07:05

Why should the Greens be included? They haven't enjoyed a surge in popularity, nor are they covered by every media source in the land like Tories and Labour plus UKIP.

The reason they're higher than Lib Dems is not because they've grown, but because the Libs have fallen so far. Not to mention their one MP is the best they'll ever achieve in anyone's lifetime.

Jerrybob · 30/10/14 - 07:23

The solution would be only to allow those parties polling over 10% to join the debates.

IanP · 30/10/14 - 07:51

The full BBC response to the Greens can be read here

Summary:

The letter says that: “UKIP has demonstrated a substantial increase in electoral support since 2014 across a range of elections along with a consistent and robust trend across a full range of opinion polls; the Green Party has not demonstrated any comparable increase in support in either elections or opinion polls. The performance in elections of the Greens in relation to the Liberal Democrats has been mainly the result of the decrease in support for the latter as opposed to a significant increase in support for the Green Party; opinion polls do not as yet demonstrate that the Greens have drawn level with the Liberal Democrats. Even if they did, we would still, of course, be taking as our starting point the result of the 2010 general election, where the Lib Dems took more than 50 seats and 23% share of the vote, demonstrating a level of electoral support overall substantially ahead of the Green Party.”

The letter goes on to say that the BBC “will continue to keep any new evidence of increased support for the Green Party under close review” and that if the debate proposal is successful, the BBC would be “offering appropriate opportunities to other political parties – including the Green Party – to ensure that the BBC’s election coverage does satisfy the overarching obligation of due impartiality across the UK.”

Nessun Dorma · 30/10/14 - 10:33

Pat_Smith wrote: »

Of course they can. And, rightly, they have.

In which case, the should also exclude UKIP. They also only have one member of parliament.

Nessun Dorma · 30/10/14 - 10:42

Jerrybob wrote: »

The solution would be only to allow those parties polling over 10% to join the debates.

But how would apply any criteria to qualify? Which pollsters would you consider worthy of calculating the ten per cent. Then you are left with really deciding such things based on nothing more than a guess.

david16 · 30/10/14 - 10:53

I highly doubt the lib dems will recover to the respectable 14 or 15% of the ballot box of old by the 2019/2020 or 2023/2024/2025 general election or indeed ever again the fact they got into bed with the Tories.

Nessun Dorma · 30/10/14 - 11:05

Which is a shame, because when Charles Kennedy was at the helm, they were far more effective in opposition than they have been in government.

smudges dad · 30/10/14 - 11:15

Nessun Dorma wrote: »

Which is a shame, because when Charles Kennedy was at the helm, they were far more effective in opposition than they have been in government.

Very true, although a lot of people in his area think he has lost his spark, especially with his support for the No campaign (not his view, but the way he presented it) and not bothering to turn up for important votes.

Back to topic - the BBC is yet again showing that it is an establishment **** and showing bias against any views that do not fit establishment thinking.

platelet · 30/10/14 - 11:20

Jerrybob wrote: »

The solution would be only to allow those parties polling over 10% to join the debates.

Good idea but I'd set the threshold at 20%.

smudges dad · 30/10/14 - 11:25

platelet wrote: »

Good idea but I'd set the threshold at 20%.

set it at 35%

TheTruth1983 · 30/10/14 - 11:32

TV leader debates, another vacuous American import.

We would all be better served to have local debates between local candidates in town halls up and down the country.

TV debates just push politicians further away from the electorate. Local debates will get people more engaged with their representatives.

Nessun Dorma · 30/10/14 - 11:33

TheTruth1983 wrote: »

TV leader debates, another vacuous American import.

We would all be better served to have local debates between local candidates in town halls up and down the country.

TV debates just push politicians further away from the electorate. Local debates will get people more engaged with their representatives.

What's wrong with having both?

Soppyfan · 30/10/14 - 11:34

david16 wrote: »

I highly doubt the lib dems will recover to the respectable 14 or 15% of the ballot box of old by the 2019/2020 or 2023/2024/2025 general election or indeed ever again the fact they got into bed with the Tories.

But if they got into bed with a failed rainbow coalition, would we be saying exactly the same thing?

JT2060 · 30/10/14 - 11:35

smudges dad wrote: »

Very true, although a lot of people in his area think he has lost his spark, especially with his support for the No campaign (not his view, but the way he presented it) and not bothering to turn up for important votes.

Back to topic - the BBC is yet again showing that it is an establishment **** and showing bias against any views that do not fit establishment thinking.

I only heard Kennedy pop up once [on the radio I think] and give a reasoned argument for a 'No' vote. No histrionics, no doom and gloom scenarios, just succinct reasoning. I thought at the time the Better Together lot needed someone like him on board, but obviously that was a one off.

mossy2103 · 30/10/14 - 11:43

Nessun Dorma wrote: »

In which case, the should also exclude UKIP. They also only have one member of parliament.

But soon to be two going by the Rochester polls.

And maybe a few more beyond that.

And if the "1 MP" rule is followed, perhaps we should therefore include the leader of the Respect party ......

jjwales · 30/10/14 - 12:26

bluewomble88 wrote: »

Why should the Greens be included? They haven't enjoyed a surge in popularity, nor are they covered by every media source in the land like Tories and Labour plus UKIP.

Any party should be included, as long as they are contesting half the seats and therefore have a theoretical chance of being in government. It's not for the BBC to predetermine the result.

Clarisse76 · 30/10/14 - 12:39

jjwales wrote: »

Any party should be included, as long as they are contesting half the seats and therefore have a theoretical chance of being in government. It's not for the BBC to predetermine the result.

I'd base it on the number of seats being contested, but set it lower than 50%. After all, you don't need to win half of them to get in government, as the Tories and Lib Dems are currently demonstrating.

stoatie · 30/10/14 - 12:39

TBH judging by their coverage over the last year or so I'm surprised the Beeb are even bothering to have anyone except Farage. He's been on more than Ant and bloody Dec.

jjwales · 30/10/14 - 12:42

Clarisse76 wrote: »

I'd base it on the number of seats being contested, but set it lower than 50%. After all, you don't need to win half of them to get in government, as the Tories and Lib Dems are currently demonstrating.

True, but it does make you a serious contender. Wouldn't object to the threshold being a bit lower though.

Amaretto2 · 30/10/14 - 12:43

I'd like to see the Greens there, but I don't think their case is as valid as UKIP. UKIP are consistently polling much higher than they are and won the last nationwide UK election, while the Greens got about 7%.

I'd have all 5 main party leaders at all the debates. The Nationalist parties and Respect do not contest enough seats nationwide to warrant inclusion imo.

Hey there!

Quick Links

BBC will not allow the Greens on TV debates...as YouGov put the Greens ahead of LDs

Comments