thetorydiary

Tim blogged a little earlier this evening an explanation as to why he is highly sceptical about the televised leaders' election debates which have been announced this evening for next year's campaign.

As regular readers should be well aware, Tim and I do not agree on everything and this an occasion where I will put an alternative point of view.

I am very excited about the prospect of the debates. At a time when public confidence in politicians is at an all-time low, David Cameron is leading the way (remember he was first to agree to the debates) in demonstrating a willingness, in the spirit of transparency and accountability, to be cross-examined in that most public of arenas, the TV studio.

In the same way that millions sit around the TV to watch the election results coming in - hence the campaign I co-founded to Save General Election Night - I anticipate that these prime time TV encounters will also see millions engaging with the political process, and that can be no bad thing.

The Conservatives currently being favourites to win the election would not have been a legitimate reason for David Cameron to duck out of the debates. That would have been portrayed by the media and opponents as a (completely unnecessary) sign of weakness. David Cameron's ability to put the party's case convincingly is unrelated to the party's standing in the polls at any given moment.

And as for Tim's main worry that it will boost the Liberal Democrats, I suspect that the fact that the Lib Dems stand in every seat in Great Britain and already have 60-odd seats in the Commons could have made it legally difficult to exclude them.

But we should not be afraid of taking them on and I have every confidence that David Cameron - and Gordon Brown for that matter - will hammer home at every opportunity the fact that Nick Clegg is in no position to become Prime Minister at the election and remind voters that the election really is - to coin a phrase - a two-horse race.

I believe that the general election will be a close-run contest nationally and that as polling day gets closer, people's minds will be focused on the stark choice of either returning Gordon Brown and a failing Labour Government to office or voting for change and the fresh start offered by David Cameron. The country needs a decisive outcome and should Clegg try to argue about the benefits of a hung Parliament - particularly when he is unable to indicate what he and his party would do in that position - then Mark Field's recent platform post provides many of the counter-arguments.

So let's embrace the debates as a positive development for the democratic process - bring them on!

Jonathan Isaby

I posted this reaction to the news that there will be three election debates earlier:

"I am disappointed if this story is true. Heading for a massive defeat these debates are a lifeline for Gordon Brown. They will also be a big boost for Nick Clegg. He'll be given a status that the third party in British politics has never had before. Polls suggest Cameron will win the debate and there are very low expectations for Brown (which will suit his advisers). I hope CCHQ don't live to regret this decision."

The most we should have given Nick Clegg was two debates. He isn't going to be Prime Minister. The nation deserved a Brown V Cameron head-to-head if there are to be debates.

On PoliticalBetting Mike Smithson puts it well:

"There’s little doubt that this will shape the entire election campaign and there’s also little doubt that these will become a permanent feature of UK general elections. The big winner from this is Nick Clegg who’ll gain a lot by being seen on the same platform as the other two. That fact has the potential to hurt both the bigger parties - particularly Labour. But the big loser could possibly be David Cameron who, in my view, has made a seriously bad decision. When you are in as strong a position as he is then the last thing he should have agreed to is something that could be a game-changer. Anything could happen. As we’ve seen in the US how the candidates are seen and react with each other can matter more than what they say."

My alarm at CCHQ agreeing to debates (largely I think because they'd boxed themselves into a difficult position) is NOT a lack of confidence in Cameron. This is what I replied to "Irene" earlier:

"When you heading for a majority of 80 you can only really lose from these debates. My main worry is the boost it will give to the Liberal Democrats. They'll get more attention than they've ever had in an election before. Even if Cameron wins every debate I can't see our position being much stronger than it is today."

I don't believe they'll enhance democracy either but that's a subject for another day.

Tim Montgomerie

According to the Telegraph, a deal has been done that will see history made in the run-up to next year's general election with three debates being held between the party leaders:

"It will be the first time that British party leaders have gone head-to-head in a live television battle similar to those in American presidential elections. Barring a last-minute hitch an announcement will be made tonight. It comes after fierce negotiating between Number 10, David Cameron’s office and the BBC, ITV News and Sky News."

David Cameron was of course the first to agree to the proposal when put by Sky News back in September.

According to the BBC, all three leaders will take part in the debates with the following schedule:

1. ITV debate chaired by Alistair Stewart
2. Sky News debate chaired by Adam Boulton
3. BBC debate chaired by David Dimbleby

5.45pm update:

Speaking at a Cameron Direct meeting in Leamington Spa, David Cameron welcomed the agreement as "a thoroughly good thing":

"I've been pushing for two years for this to happen, I've always believed in live television debates. I think they can help enliven our democracy, I think they will help answer people's questions, I think they will help crystallise the debate about the change this country needs and I'm delighted that they are taking place. I think it's a step forward for our democracy and I think it's something that, in such a bad year for politics and Parliament, we can proudly celebrate. We've joined the 21st century, when every other democracy seems to have leader's debates, we're now going to have them right here in Britain and I think that's a very good thing."

Reaction from Tim Montgomerie: "I am disappointed if this story is true. Heading for a massive defeat these debates are a lifeline for Gordon Brown. They will also be a big boost for Nick Clegg. He'll be given a status that the third party in British politics has never had before. Polls suggest Cameron will win the debate and there are very low expectations for Brown (which will suit his advisers). I hope CCHQ don't live to regret this decision."

> Tim Montgmerie's full reaction to the proposed TV debates

> Jonathan Isaby explains why he is delighted the debates are taking place

Jonathan Isaby