Posts Tagged ‘Question time’

Question Time summary: Sod off, we run the country.

October 31, 2011

I’ve only just watched my tape of Question Time but my summary seems to be that on the EU referendum, the public was not (?)really interested and anyway the manifesto’s of all three parties might have sounded as though they would let us have a referendum but they didn’t and so it didn’t matter which of the three main parties we might have voted for, we weren’t really given that option.

So even though the polls showed a majority in favour of a referendum, we weren’t going to get one, because we wouldn’t give the right answer and the lesson of the Irish referendum was that it would cost too much, holding referenda until we got it right.

This was immediately followed by the discussion on Protests, where it was generally agreed by the politicians that we should be allowed to protest, in a Democracy, but not where it would attract attention, or force politicians to take notice.

Best would be to let the politicians get on with the business of selling off the country, as their counterparts in Greece are doing, and where, apparently, they are selling off whole islands to whomsoever can afford one at a bargain basement price.

It’s not clear, whether that’s with vacant possession, or whether those living there will now become serfs, again.

Of course it won’t be so bad here, as the Enclosures Act, dispossessed the peasants ages ago and all the land is now owned, most by a small group e.g. Duke Westminster, The Queen, The Churches.

I almost forgot MOD land that was seized for WWII; that could be sold off.

It’d be ironic if Germans bought it.

 

Advertisements

RIP Question Time

June 10, 2011

sent 10/6/11

I am depressed.
The BBC’s Question Time used to be an opportunity for members of the Public to put awkward questions to politicians.
This provided the entertaining spectacle of watching politician’s squirm as they tried to offer up their tutored responses, only to dig themselves deeper and deeper into the mire, until rescued by a chortling David Dimbleby.
Alas! no more.
Last night saw two important questions, for which many of us would like to have seen some intelligent explanation given, simply pushed aside.
Both questions were couched in terms of the cuts being made in public services.
The first was about overseas aid and the second was about the incursion into Libya’s domestic problems.
At first, it seemed that we might get a bit of squirming, as the Government representative trotted out the rapidly clichéd phrases of “Hard decisions” and “bare cupboards”.
The debate was quickly hijacked by Germaine Greer, assisted by Charles Clarke.
Apart from Charles Clarke’s facile deviation into the suggestion that giving away money bought us friends, the totality of the response lay in claiming that it was our moral duty to give away money and to protect some of the Libyan people, from the rest.
Every attempt to pose a relevant point, querying this view, was met by an increasingly indignant assertion of it being our moral duty to venture deeper into national debt to pay for these policies.
David Dimbleby’s reference to India, about these foreign Government’s not considering it their moral duty to look after their own people and put their interests above those of other nations, was simply ignored and battered down by further moral indignation.
Peter Hitchen’s confrontational manner made it difficult to pursue the point raised about our right to intervene in Libya and prevented anyone from querying why such arguments could not be applied to scores of similarly placed countries, where despots were murdering those who opposed them.
If Question Time is to become simply a platform for the more, strident and vocal members of the chatterati, then it loses its point.

Alex Salmond Question Time… 2

April 15, 2011

I almost cried when Alex Salmond suggested that we, the English, should not let our present political parties destroy our National Health Service. We can’t!!!

I almost screamed when the audience applauded Michael Howard, who had claimed that only the First past the Post system could produce a Government that was accountable to the electorate. I.e. that if they didn’t do what we wanted we could kick them out.  How could they applaud that????

We get to vote every 4/5 years for Tweedledee or Tweedledum. In between they claim to have a mandate to do as they damn well please, regardless of what they may have promised, pre-election.

Where’s the accountability? How can people applaud someone uttering such arrant lies?

interviewed politicians

February 11, 2011

It was interesting to contrast the way in which Francis Maude (Question Time) and Nick Clegg (Breakfast on BBC) responded to questions about councillors complaining about cuts.

Francis Maude insisted on repeatedly trotting out a rehearsed response, prefaced by a loosely relevant  “let me put this in context of Labour’s mismanagement of the Economy”. The antagonism created by this brick wall evasiveness and the almost contemptuous resistance to attempts to force a straight answer, served only to portray him as lying politician.

On the other hand, Nick Clegg, responded with a straight forward acceptance of the complaint and a bald statement that this was something that had to be done. By not attempting to slag off Labour, or to evade the question, he actually left little to attack. Nick Clegg may not be flavour of the month but he makes a more attractive political interviewee.