Mark Stuart: Prepare to be turned off by the great TV election debate

ONE of the most striking things about this General Election campaign has been the large number of people who have yet to make up their minds. That makes Thursday's first Prime Ministerial debate on ITV between the three main party leaders all the more important. Could we see what the Americans like to call a "game-changer", in which the tiniest mistake is blown out of all proportion, giving unstoppable momentum to one of the parties?

Certainly, the television debates carry both risks and rewards for each of the three contenders. For Gordon Brown, the risk is that he makes a big gaffe in the first debate, and then regresses to the grumpy, low self-esteem Gordon we got used to during his first two years in office.

But in the last four months or so, we've seen a new, more self-confident Gordon Brown. The reason? Lord Mandelson and Alastair Campbell have been pressed into service to coach the Prime Minister on how to come across as more human on television. There is nothing unusual in this. In her early years as Tory leader, Mrs Thatcher was by no means a natural debater, but she employed Gordon Reece, a former television producer to lower the tone of her voice to make it sound less shrill. It worked.

Hide Ad
Hide Ad

Brown's coaching has also paid off, shown most vividly during his interview with Piers Morgan in February. Although much derided at the time, the Morgan interview had a favourable impact on public attitudes towards the Prime Minister. Brown will be hoping for much the same "cut-through" with the voters. He will also be helped by the fact that public expectations of him will be so low that any signs of humanity or normality from Brown are likely to have a disproportionately positive effect.

Meanwhile, David Cameron must be regretting his foolhardy decision to challenge Brown to these debates. It all dates back to a Question Time appearance that Cameron gave during the Tory leadership contest with David Davis back in 2005. There is no denying that Cameron is a very good performer on television, but he has everything to lose. In particular, Cameron needs to cut down his personal attacks, and concentrate on coming across as a Prime Minister-in-waiting.

Conversely, Nick Clegg has almost everything to gain. Not only will he achieve valuable name recognition (half of the public still don't know him when shown a photo), but he can also portray himself as the fresh alternative to the other two tired old parties. The Liberal Democrat leader's name was also first out of the hat, so he has the honour of speaking in the very first minute of the first Prime Ministerial debate at a British General Election. The only risk is that Clegg blows it by coming across as too angry. So my advice Nick is, by all means have a populist swipe at the bankers, as Vince Cable

did in the Chancellors' debate, but don't overdo it: you will come across as an over-excitable teenager.

Hide Ad
Hide Ad

But my biggest fear is the chosen format. For a start, 90 minutes is too long; Cameron's "great ignored" will turn into the "incredibly bored" within 20 minutes. Crucially, the amount of time that ordinary voters will have to grill the politicians has been pared down to the bare minimum.

This is the fault of the broadcasters. In their eagerness to secure a deal, they ceded far too much ground to the politicians. No fewer than 76 clauses have been agreed, meaning that heckling and even applause are not allowed during the debates.

Instead of being Grand Inquisitors in the manner of Sir Robin Day, the presenters will be reduced to mere "moderators": for that read timekeepers primed with stopwatches, calling time on dreary soundbites from the three leaders. This is a big mistake.

You won't have any great

television moments like 2005 when ordinary voters got stuck into Blair over Iraq. It will send British political coverage back to the 1950s, when leaders were politely asked if they'd like to make a comment by obsequious reporters.

Hide Ad
Hide Ad

Because of the time required for preparation, the three leaders will also spend less time on the stump meeting ordinary voters. The debates will become the spine of the campaign, and the media will obsess about them.

But will the public be watching? I know one couple who've already decided to cancel their national newspapers for the duration of the election campaign: "It will be all yellow, blue and red." Perhaps they should consider getting rid of their television set as well. Prepare to be turned off.