WATCH: Farage challenges Miliband to a Debate

[-:Undertaker:-]

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/david-cameron/10807309/David-Cameron-ready-to-take-on-Nigel-Farage-in-live-debate.html

David Cameron ready to take on Nigel Farage in live debate

The Prime Minister could take on Nigel Farage, the Ukip leader in a televised debate that will also include Labour, the Liberal Democrats and the Green party


http://i.telegraph.co.uk/multimedia/archive/02888/farage-cameron_2888914b.jpg
David Cameron is ready to take on Nigel Farage in a live televised debate before the election.


David Cameron is ready to take on Nigel Farage in a live televised debate before the election.

The Prime Minister plans to take part in three leaders’ debates with his political rivals.

In a plan drawn up by his aides Mr Cameron would be willing to appear in television debates in a 2-3-5 format, The Sunday Times reported.

The Prime Minister is understood not to have ruled anything out before talks on the format for the debates begin in earnest in the autumn.

One head-to-head with Ed Miliband the Labour leader - as the other potential prime minister - a second, which would also include Liberal Democrat leader, Nick Clegg and a third with Mr Farage and the Green party leader Natalie Bennett.

One of the debates would be held during the campaign, with the other beforehand, the newspaper reported.

A No 10 source said: "It is speculation on what might happen in talks that are not going to happen for several months.

"We have not ruled anything in or out, so that means people can speculate what might happen in the talks.

"But the reality is these talks are several months away."

Last month the Labour leader said the previous format of three debates between the three main party leaders over three weeks should be a "starting point" but that he was open to moves such as a less formal setting and greater voter participation in any repeat of the 2010 confrontations.

He used a Radio Times article to call for immediate negotiations, accusing his main rival of being the "single biggest obstacle" to them going ahead and suggesting the Tories were keen to deny his cash-strapped party vital publicity.

Britain's first such debates, between Mr Cameron, Gordon Brown and Mr Clegg, were staged on the BBC, ITV and Sky News in 2010 after prolonged negotiations between the parties and the TV companies, which resulted in very strict rules on the style of questioning and the division of time for leaders' answers.

Mr Cameron has since complained that they "took all the life out" of the campaign amid constant speculation over whether the practice would be revived, and if so in what form.

Mr Farage repeated his challenge to the Conservative leader in response to claims he was "chicken" for ruling out a run at Parliament in the Newark by-election.

The Ukip leader said: "Mr Cameron said ... that I was a chicken. Well, I'll tell you what Dave, why don't you come on telly and do a debate with me?"

Opinion polls suggested Mr Farage beat Mr Clegg in two debates ahead of this month's European elections.

The sudden switch by Cameron on this (so it's rumoured) appears to me to be an attempt on his behalf of trying to pre-emptively include Farage but not in the three leaders debate - something that would be very hard for him and the broadcasters to argue to Ofcom if Ukip top the polls this month in the European Elections.

Either way, some kind of mixed format would be good... and i'm quite glad the Greens are being considered tbh.

Thoughts?

[Mark]

I really have no idea why he wouldn't be included, according to the polls he's going to win more seats than the Lib Dems. Not sure why the Greens would be included considering they won their first seat in the last General Election (I'm sure it was in Brighton?) and have no real evidence to show they're going to progress much further. Although saying that some polls show them gaining the same percentage as the Lib Dems lol.

[-:Undertaker:-]

Here's a video from today of Farage challenging Miliband to a debate -



https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JKRvctW4wTc

[Mark]

Here's a video from today of Farage challenging Miliband to a debate -



https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JKRvctW4wTc

Miliband's face at the end is priceless haha, I watched it this morning.

[dbgtz]

"There are two people who could be Prime Minister after the next election"
Yes that is so true, I wonder if it will be Cameron or Farage.

But seriously the fact that he said that, is aware of it and it is completely true just makes me depressed.

[The Don]

It would be a massacre

[dbgtz]

After watching the video below, I can't wait to see this.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jlTggc0uBA8

[Inseriousity.]

lol he looks stoned before you even click play.
I would like to see a 2-3-5 format, sounds like a good idea, although there is speculation that this sort of suggestion was a political move to weasel out of doing it. I can't remember how it'd work though lol

[dbgtz]

lol he looks stoned before you even click play.
I would like to see a 2-3-5 format, sounds like a good idea, although there is speculation that this sort of suggestion was a political move to weasel out of doing it. I can't remember how it'd work though lol

I think the 2-3-5 format is poor and just supports the crappy FPTP system.

I think there should be 4 debates with 3 or 4 parties + the biggest "national party". So SNP, Plaid Cyrmu and Sinn Fein. In my head it would be UKIP for England as they don't really seem to have ground outside of it, but I haven't thought it through that much.

[-:Undertaker:-]

Good Telegraph comment here, nail on head.


This is really a case of 'Farage management'. David Cameron knows that if he does debate with Nigel Farage he may lose (in the eyes of many of the public), but that it will be worse if he doesn't because people will say he didn't dare. So he is trying to work out how to minimize the UKIP threat.

There's a kind of 'I'm coming to get you' feeling building up around UKIP, and the poster showing the three party leaders with EU stars as gags has really hit the spot. David Cameron hasn't yet got an answer to it.


https://pbs.twimg.com/media/Bm3l9OHIQAA47_0.jpg


I think the 2-3-5 format is poor and just supports the crappy FPTP system.

I think there should be 4 debates with 3 or 4 parties + the biggest "national party". So SNP, Plaid Cyrmu and Sinn Fein. In my head it would be UKIP for England as they don't really seem to have ground outside of it, but I haven't thought it through that much.

The only problem with that is that you'd open it up to accusations from the DUP and others that it's giving their opponent a boost. :P

[Kardan]

I'd change the 2-3-5 to 2-4-5 personally. I also agree that the only two parties which stand a chance at winning the general election are Labour and the Conservatives.

[dbgtz]

Good Telegraph comment here, nail on head.




https://pbs.twimg.com/media/Bm3l9OHIQAA47_0.jpg



The only problem with that is that you'd open it up to accusations from the DUP and others that it's giving their opponent a boost. :P

Ahh that is true, could easily have their opponents invited too. I think my point mainly is that more "local" alternatives need to be shown :P

[Chippiewill]

2-3-5 actually makes the most sense. 2 for debates between people who might actually be PM. 3 for debates between leaders of parties which will actually win significant numbers of seats. 5 for debates between leaders of parties which will have a significant proportion of the vote.

Anyone who believes that UKIP will win loads of seats at the next general election are crazy, they may be polling nearly 40% for the EU elections however they're still polling around 12% for the general election. Couple this with our FPTP system and a lack of any areas of significant focussed UKIP support and many analysts are predicting that UKIP will still win NO seats at the next general election. Even the libdems on whatever pathetic level they are will beat UKIP on seats.

The irony is that UKIP are being mostly voted for in a position where they have the least effect.

[-:Undertaker:-]

2-3-5 actually makes the most sense. 2 for debates between people who might actually be PM. 3 for debates between leaders of parties which will actually win significant numbers of seats. 5 for debates between leaders of parties which will have a significant proportion of the vote.

Anyone who believes that UKIP will win loads of seats at the next general election are crazy, they may be polling nearly 40% for the EU elections however they're still polling around 12% for the general election. Couple this with our FPTP system and a lack of any areas of significant focussed UKIP support and many analysts are predicting that UKIP will still win NO seats at the next general election. Even the libdems on whatever pathetic level they are will beat UKIP on seats.

The irony is that UKIP are being mostly voted for in a position where they have the least effect.

Whilst FPTP is still a hurdle, this is beginning to change in some seats that have been polled so far - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Opinion_polling_in_individual_constituencies_for_t he_next_United_Kingdom_general_election The purples could well win a number of seats, or, as you say - they could win no seats. I guess it'll be decided properly by broadcasters nearer the time of the next General Election.

And they're polling higher than 12%, it's more 15% to 20%.... and that's for the moment.

The one thing that gives me hope in regards to the FPTP hurdle is this: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Canadian_federal_election,_1993 It'll be difficult, but with the right by-elections it could happen.


https://pbs.twimg.com/media/Blg0DoQCMAAn8cx.png

Strongholds are beginning to emerge, we'll see if they can add to them in the Locals on 22nd May.

[GommeInc]

I'm actually shocked by UKIP in my area. The local candidate came to the door to talk to us... I've lived here for years and never seen a candidate come to the door and he was shockingly friendly and actually had some good policies. His policies were:

- To give my area a voice (I live in the outer bit of a large village - we get ignored despite paying the most council tax and not being a cost to the village)
- To give my village a voice in the main town (as above, we get ignored)
- To hold monthly forums to discuss matters that will be pushed to the Council (he even says he will do this even if not elected)
- To improve the local Medical Centre by tweaking the opening hours and to stop the village being developed any further (it's stretched... quite badly)
- Improve transport links to the main town as well as to other towns in the area
- Promote local growth, particularly small businesses
- Promote community spirt - we gave up having an annual fayre recently because the parish council was lazy. Funds were there.

In short he realised we don't seem to be represented in the Parish Council let alone the Borough Council. The fact he is going out of his way to speak to people is enough to win my vote, as it shows he at least cares and isn't a career politician who treats it like any other job. Being social is kind of important, especially in small villages.

It's strange, as it doesn't exactly scream out "monster raving racist party", but apparently only a small minority actually think this according to a poll recently. In fact, more people think they attract racists by coincidence, not necessarily by choice.