BBC BLOGS - Newsnight: From the web team
« Previous | Main | Next »

Monday 10 May 2010

Sarah McDermott | 11:23 UK time, Monday, 10 May 2010

Here's Kirsty with more details on what's coming up on tonight's programme:

It's 3pm in the afternoon and we have no idea how the programme will open tonight - it couldn't be any more exciting. Will we have a new government or not? And at what price? Is this all about pragmatism now, not principle? Nick Clegg is meeting Lib Dem MPs as I write, and he has to carry 75% of his MPs in the first instance. David Cameron is at the moment meeting his Shadow Cabinet. There are also lines of communication open between the Lib Dems and Labour.

And if a deal is done between the Conservatives and Lib Dems, where does that leave Gordon Brown? No matter what we'll be talking to senior politicians on the show and Michael Crick and David Grossman will be making sense of it all - if there is sense of it to be made.

The eurozone and the International Monetary Fund have found 750 billion euros to sort out the Greek debt crisis and the markets have responded well. Will this be enough to restore Euro stability? Paul Mason has the answer.

And we'll be joined by some new MPs to discuss their roles in the next parliament.

From earlier today...

Here's what we're planning for tonight:

Nick Clegg has asked people to "bear with us" a bit longer as the Liberal Democrats and the Conservatives enter a third day of negotiations on forming a government. Tonight Michael Crick will be explaining the extent of any likely agreenment and outlining what the sticking points might be.

David Grossman will be investigating how any deal is likely to go down with the grassroots of both the parties.

And Paul Mason will be examining the Euro bailout deal and the measures that have been taken to counter the risk of the Greek crisis spreading to other countries.

More details later.


  • Comment number 1.


    Clegg took the leadership JUST two years after changing from MEP to MP - one corrupt institution swapped for another. He is clearly infinitely relaxed about corruption (or, perhaps, has no problem with it, if it does not IMPEDE him).

    Now he is faced with the need for some considerable sleight of hand (and pronouncement) if his upward rush is to continue. He will have to choose between corruption and political demotion.

    What does the CV indicate?

  • Comment number 2.

    #1 barriesingleton

    Given you don't support party politics how much experience could any new candidate have coming to Parliament?

    Some of the people who stood for parliament like Nick Griffin of the BNP were the alleged targets of threats to kill from their party members, allegedly over incompetence and expenses. Thats with no experience of Parliament and many believe that the BNP are a Nazi Party uninterested in democracy.

    But those who do support party politics and the Lib Dems are happy with their choice and its not corrupt to cooperate - if he can.

    If he can't that is not a political demotion is it?

  • Comment number 3.

    Are we there yet with the negotiations?

    The good thing is that people can see, even Tories, that the two parties are making genuine efforts to cooperate to get the country the result that it wanted when you consider votes.

    But the bad thing is that it probably perpetuates the skew of first past the post and therefore unfair votes and the minority of 36% dictating views not shared by the majority.

    There could still be majority governments with PR but it would require the power of ideas communicated into popularity rather than power delivered by an outdated voting system.

    I would not be terribly sad if there were new elections myself.

  • Comment number 4.

  • Comment number 5.

    David Sanger in the New York Times:

    "Now, after the bungled car-bombing attempt in Times Square with suspected links to the Pakistani Taliban, a new, and disturbing, question is being raised in Washington: Have the stepped-up attacks in Pakistan — notably the Predator drone strikes — actually made Americans less safe? Have they had the perverse consequence of driving lesser insurgencies to think of targeting Times Square and American airliners, not just Kabul and Islamabad? In short, are they inspiring more attacks on America than they prevent?

    It is a hard question. "

    I can't see myself that if you departed from Afghanistan it would be an end as it was never an imperial war. They would simply continue the war moving from "defence" to "attack" predominantly.

    To me the question is what is the relationship between al Qaeda the Pakistan and Afghan Talibs and also Laskar-e-Taiba.

    Are they effectively merging and how would or should that effect the conduct of the war?

    On my primitive understanding I cannot understand why they can't happily hit the transiting fighters going to and from Pakistan so that they increase the stability of both Afghanistan and Pakistan.

    The impending talks with Karzai in the US should be pretty interesting in terms of dealing with the corruption that undermines the stability in Afghanistan and the drugs originating from there.

  • Comment number 6.

  • Comment number 7.

    NN "Tonight Michael Crick will be explaining the extent of any likely agreenment and outlining what the sticking points might be. David Grossman will be investigating how any deal is likely to go down with the grassroots of both the parties."

    Weve had weeks now of crystal ball gazing by BBC and NN staffers on what might happen. I'm more interested in the issues under discussion by NN bloggers - the GBP not staff who may have to follow a BBC agenda.

  • Comment number 8.

    Best feet forward

    An arrangement rather than a coalition with the Conservatives would seem the best way forward for the LibDems and with a bit of luck the framework for that arrangement is being constructed today; because of the electoral stasis provided by our first past the post system, electoral/political reform has to be second top of the agenda, after details of how the public deficit will be tackled; personally, I would leave it at that. We will have another election, probably after a referendum on voting systems; nine months time?

    I do chuckle at the hysteria in the media; the Grauniad breathlessly telling us today what kind of sandwiches each negotiating team ordered, Laura, Captain of the sixth form debating team at Glasgow High School for Gels, sonorously repeating the mantra of 24 hour news; "WE-JUST-DON'T-KNOW-JOHN" and John Sopel looking increasingly bemused by all the shenanigans.

    Gordon WHO?

  • Comment number 9.

    Re the UK's electoral reform debate: look at British Columbia's experiences- First Past The Post is voters' preference...

    After the British Columbia (BC) elections of 2001, the new govt committed to a comprehensive 'look at' electoral systems change over the duration of the coming Parliament, to be followed by a binding referendum during the next BC election to be held in 2005...

    A 'Citizens Commission on electoral Reform' was established with a mandate to sift through the MANY AND VARIED forms of alternative electoral systems to the First Past The Post system that was, and still is, in place here in British Columbia...

    To make up the 'Citizens Commission', 160 'BC citizens' were chosen at random- 2 from each electoral constituency and 2 from the aboriginal community ....

    The Commission met for several months; scheduled heavily-publicized public consultation meetings; & accepted written submissions from concerned persons & groups...

    Eventually, in its report the Commission recommended that BC adopt the Single Transferable Vote (STV) system. Its report was sent to every household in BC.

    As part of the 2005 BC election, the Commission's recommendation was put to BC voters in a referendum, which failed.

    Another referendum- using the same question as the 2005 one- was held as part of the May-2009 BC election.

    It also failed with less than 38% of votes for the Commission's recommended changes...

    No further referendums or potential changes to BC's 'First Past The Post' electoral system are planned or proposed...


    Voters in the UK can only be best served by competent government that is enabled to make hard, often complex, decisive decisions- without 'sabotauge' & counterproductive interference from 'minor political partie(s)' that are cohabiting with the govt's majority political party...

    Look at Holland, & its looming, unessesary elections due in about 2-months...

    Their elections are due to, in effect, Holland's govt falling over a dispute- between a centre left 'minor party' cohabiting in govt with that country's centre right party- over Afghanistan & Holland's mmaintaining its military presence there...

    How would the UK benifit from a governmental system where, in the middle of a crisis, the govt can't make decisions- or makes innapropriate decisions- due to idealogical disputes between political parties that are cohabiting in the govt of a reformed UK governance system??


    Reference links:

    "British Columbia electoral reform referendum, 2005":,_2005

    2) "BC Referendum on Electoral Reform 2009":

    3) "British Columbia electoral reform referendum, 2009":,_2009

    Roderick V. Louis,
    Vancouver, BC, Canada

  • Comment number 10.

    On 19th March I had a simple breath test at Chelsea & Westminster Hospital to see whether helicobacter pylori bacteria associated with a duodenal ulcer I'd had was succcessfully treated with a harsh course of antibiotics. Not having heard of the results for a few weeks I kept going to the Endoscopy Department to check if there was any news. In the end I had to insist on getting the details of the company that analyses these tests. Having contacted them by e-mail
    they responded very quickly that they'd never received mine.

    I obviously insisted on having another one for which I went in this morning. A lot of chaos was happening in the waiting room. After a 2 or more hour wait I did have the test but during the wait I experienced a return of physical symptoms of extreme pressure on my body both internally and externally making me feel as if I was going to get paralysed. These intensified further by Bucks outside. Next me there was a guy with a brown dog looking very 'pleased' with himself.

    Luckily, after a drink of lemonade in a pub and a long walk to Watts' Horseman in Kensington Gardens I did manage to skate without my sense of balance affected which had happened in January and lasted for about 2 months.

    Each time I go to hospital my symptoms get worse. That's Labour for you.

  • Comment number 11.

    #10. addendum

    I don't know how many times I heard 'OK??, sometthing that the db tutor told me once accompanied by a twink under the left eye.

  • Comment number 12.

    The swinging swinging party what's wrong with

    I prefer cheese and violence partys

  • Comment number 13.

    The Euro is about to disintegrate. The fast collapse of the European central bank and Stirling is already in mid-phase. The dollar is gone but kept afloat with air, that can't continue by the way. The rush for the exits have already begun but when you watch the BBC reporting the banking crises, they always sprinkle aspartame on it. Anyhow, I'm moving into the soup kitchen industry.
    I had, five yrs ago a reckless portfolio, Two yrs ago I went cautious. Too slow (and stupid) in moving to gold left me no option but to buy property, caravans and things that actually existed. Small investors should not rely on their financial advisers in holding on to their investments anymore. Interbank lending has stopped in Eurodisney land and Wall ST is already playing the endgame. Why do financial reporters within our beeb not tell the truth, are they afraid to spook the markets? the markets are passed being spooked, what you've got is a steady and orderly exit strategy by the financial institutions, a slight-of-hand balancing act before the mad rush for the exits.

  • Comment number 14.


    cheese makes me sick

  • Comment number 15.

    Is Gordon's resignation anything to do with #10?

  • Comment number 16.


    I knew I'd 'get him' (^_^),
    though I still have to do something about Mandy.

    Any helpful ideas?

  • Comment number 17.

    Further to ....

    32. At 8:07pm on 07 May 2010, JAperson

    Ah Ha!

    So Top Con has made Uno Lib Dim an offer that all know has to be refused.

    Gee! That’s the zenith of high level politics! Come in with a low bid so that you have plenty to negotiate ‘up’? (Or is this a ‘one and only final offer design to force the scenario of” I’ve got the mandate for ‘going it alone’ “)


    So know we get a real example of what ‘an honourable man’ actually is!

    Top Con has repeatedly stated the desire to put ‘the interests of the country first’!

    Ha - loobdy - Ha!

    Big - Enormous - Gigantic Ha - loobdy - Ha!

    He - aptly, perhaps, Top Big Con - has put the demands of his paymasters way ahead of all of the ‘bluster’ of the last five years of his leadership sic! Anyone with an iota of sense know that the Lib Dims should never go with the peanuts on offer from the man whom so desperately wants to be the organ grinder. Anyone whom watched Lad Here’s-my-time (again!) on yesterday’s Politics Show was told quite plainly that the puppeteers of the Big Con Party will never surrender the only route to absolute power that they so desperately crave!

    And what of “I - don’t really - know where I’m going” Uno Lib Dim ....

    Was he - is he? - really prepared to sell the Dim Collective down the Swan-nee so as to stand in Top Con’s shadow until he no longer has any use stroke credibility?

    And does he really think that the number of seats ‘he’ sic won makes him omnipotent to the point of ‘deciding’ whom should lead another political party!

    Even though the right wings hacks have been whipping the PM from the very word “go” - a practice just as prevalent before the results as since and no doubt designed by the big con media jiffies to ‘remind’ the lib dims of what the ‘demonised’ alternative might be! - the No 10 Lodger (That’s all that any of them are, but they seem all too often to forget that fact!) has proven that he is truly prepared to put to country first ....

    Will he get any credit for it?

    One can already see the hacks efforts for a headline tomorrow ....

    “Gordo’s .... the Goner!”

    “Brown abdicates .... Squatting no more!”

    “No 10. Under Offer .... with vacant possession!”

    But He has undoubtedly proven that he is ....

    An Honourable Man!

    (And we may well yet miss him!)

  • Comment number 18.

    #8 kash
    “because of the electoral stasis provided by our first past the post system, electoral/political reform has to be second top of the agenda, after details of how the public deficit will be tackled; personally, I would leave it at that.”

    A agree: less priority for electoral/political reform than for dealing with the deficit. But it seems doubtful that the two parties can work together without making some commitment to review and the public have been promised such.

    “We will have another election, probably after a referendum on voting systems; nine months time?”

    That depends on many things, ranging from earlier rioting in the streets over job cuts and higher taxes, to a much longer period for decisions on what electoral/political reforms to recommend to (or impose on) the GBP.

    #9 Roderick
    Thanks for your experience of electoral reform being rejected in British Columbia. Our experience may be different as the British public has been cheated out of promised referenda before and may be keener to get promised changes. On the basis of BC’s rejection you condemn reform in UK:-

    “Voters in the UK can only be best served by competent government that is enabled to make hard, often complex, decisive decisions- without 'sabotage' & counterproductive interference from 'minor political partie(s)' that are cohabiting with the govt's majority political party... “ Spoken like a staunch statist!

    To which I would respond with my previously stated views, that:-

    • Our major political party ignored major public protest against war in Iraq;
    • Despite a huge majority failed to ‘think the unthinkable’ on reform of social services and uncontrolled immigration;
    • All 3 major parties failed to provide effective opposition and need challenge from minor parties - democratically voted for by a substantial percentage of the voting public; and
    • There are examples of successful electoral reform, e.g. Australia, and we should work on a system that eliminates any snags that others have found.

    The Electoral Reform Society has a comprehensive description and evaluation of alternative voting systems at:-

    Their most convincing argument for Single Transferable Vote (STV) is “Putting the power in the hands of the voters.”

    There are other political reforms that need addressing, so we should not expect an early change but CHANGE has been promised and England Expects Every Man to do His Duty, particularly our elected representatives.

  • Comment number 19.


    10. At 3:55pm on 10 May 2010, mimpromptu wrote:

    Quote ........ That's Labour for you. ...... Unquote.

    Wrong attribution ....

    Try “couriers’ and ‘panic attack’!

    Also ....

    7. At 1:27pm on 10 May 2010, indignantindegene wrote:

    Pertinent - and accurate - observation!

    Does anyone know of ANY use of ANY point made in this ‘blog’ - by deez mere mortals -during any of Nn’s election coverage?

    Twits .... Yes!

    ‘posters’ .... No!

  • Comment number 20.

    I wonder whether singie is aware that he is being duped by Mandy's probably closest mate and collaborator, originally signing as jj?

  • Comment number 21.

    anyone else see sky adam boulton lose it with ali campbell?

  • Comment number 22.

    Speaking of horses, one of the tunes I skated to this afternoon, despite the ice being really awful and dangerous to skate on as they've stopped resurfacing it at 1.45 pm, was Susan Boyle's 'Wild Horses'.

  • Comment number 23.

    Call me cynical, but I wouldn't be surprised to learn that the 'E.U. leaders' meeting was partly designed to stitch up what Merkel and co assumed would be a new U.K. government. Alistair Darling may have sold us out again (no matter what his protestations are), but I bet the Europhiles were hoping it was Osborne wot dun it.

    We can assume any forthcoming catastrophic crisis in Spain and Portugal will be portrayed as an 'E.U.' crisis and not as a 'Euro' crisis, so we'll have to dip in to our pockets.

    An engineered test of our EUphilia, no doubt.

  • Comment number 24.

    @ Mim #20 - Jeremy is also a friend of Lord Mandelson

    @ Jaunty #21 - oh yes - saw that!!!!

    @ Struggling #23 - do you seriously think that the government (whoever it will be!) will not be making a profit on lending money ;o)

  • Comment number 25.

    Brown's words from earlier today:

    " i have no desire to stay in my position (as Prime Minister)- ANY LONGER* THAN IS NEEDED to ensure the path to economic growth is assured and the process of political reform, we have agreed**, moves forward quickly...... "

    * 2 HOURS OR 30-YEARS??

    ** 'we have agreed': who is 'we'?? WHAT 'PROCESS' OF POLITICAL REFORM'???


    It's clear that self interest- on the part of the Libdems and some Labour party members- has over-ridden the national interest...

    While electoral reform might be of some importance to a portion of the UK electorate- this issue was a 'non-issue' during the election campaign and televised leaders debates: the economy, immigration, jobs, social programme spending, foreign policy (IE Afghanistan, Iraq, 'war on terror', etc), and defence programme spending (IE: helicopters, Trident/Vanguard successor class subs, aircraft carriers, etc) were ALL far higher on the priority list of candidates and voters than electoral reform....

    So now that the the Libdems have, by ratio, lost a considerable number of Commons seats as a result of voters expressing their views, the Libdems (& corruptly, Labour) are trying to 'change the principles and policy objectives' on which govt formation is- in a healthy democracy- predicated: the needs of the UK citizenry and the country's future roles word-wide- to ones whose chief beneficiaries are loser political party members- and parties that have not had policies and election platforms that voters have- in democratic elections- endorsed....

    Self-interest motivated politicians and political party members ought to either put the country first or call another election- or the markets are going to call time out- at huge costs to the UK, its citizenry and the country's profile world-wide....

    Roderick V. Louis
    Vancouver, BC, Canada

  • Comment number 26.


    And then................................NOTHING happened!

    I could do with some inertia myself right now.

  • Comment number 27.

    Due to the delays caused by power-hungry Clegg ‘the king-maker’ we have had a lame-duck Prime Minister (in name only) squatting in No10 since last week refusing to concede defeat, and now making offers of anything Clegg demands in order to stay in power as a Lab-Lib alliance.

    Her Majesty The Queen recently returned to Buckingham Palace, presumably expecting Brown’s visit to resign. In the event that this last-minute attempt to stitch up a Lab-Lib alliance succeeds, does established protocol allow the Queen to accept Brown’s claim to form a new Parliament, knowing full well that he has promised to resign as PM almost immediately after this? Or will we have to wait for Labour to choose a new Prime Minister to go to Buckingham Palace?

  • Comment number 28.

    SKY News’ Kay Burley harasses a pro PR spokesperson in the name of democracy and journalism.

  • Comment number 29.


    What's the betting that at politics school the first word they are taught to use to buy time when answering questions is.................

    ............... LOOK!

    Today I have heard it used by Tony Benn, Peter Hain, and recently by Gordon Brown, Peter Mandelson and many many more

  • Comment number 30.

    Listening to the horse trading today. Good to hear that the politians have decided the voters have served their purpose and are getting on with deciding how the future voting systems will benefit them rather than us

  • Comment number 31.

    Gordon is going when the time is right.
    If LibDems decide to stick with the Conservatives maybe Gordon will decide that the time might not be quite right after all and stretch the Labour Leader election for many months

  • Comment number 32.

    Harriet Harman denies she will stand for Labour leader.....
    That means as soon as the coast is clear - she's a pursuaded front runner

  • Comment number 33.



    How do you know?


  • Comment number 34.

    So. Ms. Wark interviews a Scots Labour MP who prefers the Tories to be in power rather than Labour. Indeed, he would bring down a Lib-Lab coalition in order to let Cameron be PM.

    He isn't asked why, of course.

    No point putting pressure on someone who prefers the Tories to the Scots Nats, eh, Kirsty?

  • Comment number 35.


    Remember; 'lies, damned lies and statistics? Well: there is logic, disingenuous logic and garbage.

    BYT is right about the Westminster ciphers using 'look', and it grates. But I am more focused on the banal statement: "The electorate voted FOR A HUNG PARLIAMENT." This is utter garbage. No sane voter would set these charlatans up to NEGOTIATE across party lines. It is bad enough being PERSONALLY cheated and lied to, without having to watch them do it to each other. Oh - no - hang on a minute . . .

  • Comment number 36.

    I know she said she won't run for the Labour leadership...but Harriet would dearly love the Job. She ain't no Thatcher though is she. Labour really have no talent in their ranks do they, can anybody spot a heavy weight Politician at all from this shower? As for the deals and horse trading. I feel sorry for the Tories right now, whilst the Libs ponce about deciding what scraps they get off the table, the rest of us are going to the dogs..hurry up will yer. Something tells me this political marriage of convenience is going to turn into a nightmare.
    And have you seen Chris Huhne giving it the big-un?..makes you wanna throw-up.

    Kirsty the seductress. Yep ,not bad for 55yrs..not bad at all!
    Michael Gove sees it a well.

  • Comment number 37.

    Two things struck me about this evening's programme.

    The first is how happy and exited the media pundits are about what is actually a developing crisis in this country. They, at least, have no constituents to serve and therefore they can come up with pure opinion.
    Would that most of us who hold down jobs in the real world could be paid to go about pontificating without any evidence base. I am talking here specifically about the BBCs "political experts".
    Secondly, I was really struck by Kirsty Wark's kid-glove treatment of Harriet Harman, when she then went on to attack the (male) conservative.
    Is this some sort of attempt to address the gender inequality ?

    If Harriet Harman had said she would stay as Deputy because she was also a wife and mother and therefore did not need to prove herself, or she was too busy with her family, or she actually put her children's interests above her own, I would have had the utmost respect for her, and indeed Kirsty herself.

    There were two powerful women who could have done a lot to put women's issues on the agenda, but they are too busy competing with the men.

  • Comment number 38.

    #33 addendum


    It may sound pretentious and even deluded if you want, but Jeremy is the only MAN I've been 'allowing' a large margin of error while among politicians in Western Democracies Barack Obama and David Cameron, until now at least.

    I am really fiercely independent. I was born like that and lifelong experiences have only strengthened my independence.


  • Comment number 39.

    Adam Boulton v Ben Bradshaw :o)

  • Comment number 40.

  • Comment number 41.

    C4 news takes your breathe away sometimes - beyond the bubbling anger at the bias you usually expect.

    If it isn't Garry Gibbon talking on behalf of Nick Clegg, it's Jon Snow promoting the Green Party manifesto and the Channel 4 team, as a whole, cheer-leading the LibDems, to scupper a Cons majority. Now, we have Victoria Macdonald attempting to protect Brown's legacy and Labour's reputation.

    Apparently, far from starving the Environment Agency of funds and strangling it in red tape, Gordon's handling of the 2007 floods was a glorious success (the owners of the homes and businesses which were flooded would disagree, no doubt). Miss Macdonald confuses genuine success with the 'success' the broadcast media proclaimed it to be, lost, as it was, in its self-proclaimed, 'honeymoon period' love affair with Mr. Brown. The 'Foot and Mouth' debacle, likewise, was a model of how to handle a crisis. You wouldn't think it cost taxpayers (don't you just wish we could concentrate on tax-spenders?) up to £8 BN. - more than the £6 BN. the 'jobs tax' will cost. But, then, for the Left, it's a case of ''govt spending' equals 'good' vs. 'business spending' equals 'bad''.

    Remaining neutral and allowing the public the decide right from wrong is just so tiring.

    Not long now for the list of C4 advertisers to boycott.

  • Comment number 42.

    This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the house rules. Explain.

  • Comment number 43.

    #40: you have done what i had considered impossible - you have raised my opinion of Peter Mandelson, he is entirely correct in his responses in this affair. And his regard for the child of his partner is heart-warming.

    --it is almost embarrassing that a journalist would think this kind of story would even be cared about by most Brits. Odious as the man could be seen as, it is NOT because of his sexuality.

  • Comment number 44.

    attempted repost #42:

    "---APV is a BAD joke. It would only increase the innate problems of the FPTP system.

    NN: please show effects of APV, compared to FPTP and PR, using the election graphic engines!

    we need PR NOW!!!!!!!! It is the only system that relates the number of seats in the Parliament, to the number of votes cast. That is the essence of representative Democracy. How could it POSSIBLY be bad?!?

    Write to your MP, to demand PR. No matter what Party they are. Or indeed, write to say why no change is necessary. Its up to you. :)

    Claire Short as PM, or at least caretaker Leader of the Labour Party until the actual Leadership Election, to be so requested by the Queen as under the British Constitution. As the basis of such a deal (requiring both the LibDems, and the smaller progressive Parties), could only be a form of Proportional Representation at the end of the day, it is almost certain that Claire would be the only acceptable candidate for caretaker until the necessary referendum. Either of the Millipedes, or Balls, would be seen as unacceptable by most, especially those who dislike Cameron and the Tories.

    [the stock markets go up and are jubilant over the Greece 'deal'] --because stock/finance markets have just been handed E750Bn (!), yet another "injection of taxpayer-money" into the banks, to the Banksters. No wonder they are "happy" and stocks soared. Cuts in Greece, like in Ireland, will cause a catastrophic economic crash - tax receipts will fall, and social payments increase. Economically, it would be utterly disastrous.

    why then have "markets" soared, when it will directly , and enormously, *harm* the actual economy?? What are generally referred to as 'the markets' by the news programmes, are in fact corrupt networks that are actually opposed to the REAL economy. What other explanation can there be that these supposed 'economic indicators' go sky-high upon reporting of bad economic news for the actual work-force/consumers?? The only reason to watch 'the Markets', is to find out what is *good* for the UK, - because those measures annoys them, and makes them 'fall'. Wouldn't *you* be happy to handed multi-£Bns in taxed (to you!) money, and unhappy to have to pay higher taxes?? But why should the wealthiest pay the *least* % of taxes compared to the majority, let alone the poorest?

    --why isn't Cameron Himself coming out to the cameras to tell us how it is going? Bit odd to be sending a mere lieutenant our for such an important task as shaping the next Govt, let alone telling the Public what is happening. He didn't seem very shy for the last few weeks, could barely let himself off our TVs for a few seconds... until now. I wonder *why*, - could it be he doesn't want to be seen as 'Deal-Making'? And then he fires the person *making* the deal, - as we saw tonight? Sounds like a *great* person to have as PM!!

    --even Brown has the gumption to come out himself to tell us what he wants, and what he has decided to choose, and what he will stand behind.

    GIVE US A REFERENDUM ON PR YOU [i]bleeping bleepers[\i]!!!!!!!! [ deepest apologies, was very annoyed with the comments at the time... the choice between having AV forced on us and a vague promise of a PR Referendum, or an AV referendum - end of story!, doesn't seem to me like much of a choice. Instead of pussy-footing around with AV, why not just go straight for PR, and put it to the Public directly for their choice ASAP?]

    --the proposed AV electoral system would boost both the Tories and Labour, a follow up general election held straight afterwards would make a both Parties much stronger, and making ACTUAL proportional Representation system FAR LESS likely, becoming not a step on the way, but a Full Stop to actual progress!

    an *even stronger* two-Party system - yummy. :/

    --local parties should remember that multi-member constituency, weak party list PR, will actually vastly reduce the ability of Central Parties to control who sits in the seats - it gives much greater strength for constituents to choose the candidate THEY like best, rather than central Party Diktat. This proposed 'APV', instead of *actual* PR, may make stronger Centralised control to be easier, which would remove more constituency-friendly MPs, and increase Party-chosen-'kissers numbers.

    those who like local power instead of Central London power should all be supporting PR, no matter what Party they are from. And no matter what their favourite Press says."

    without checking, i *think* this is the changeover to my NewsNight comments tonight...

    "--re the new right-wing ministers on the Tory front-bench: so the Tories have massively lurched to the Right??

    --if i hadn't known John Reid was 'labour', and just listened to him, i would have been surprised to learn he was *labour*, rather than *tory*, Can i presume he is a NuLabour, ie a secret Tory, rather than actual 'Labour'?

    --adonis - it is because it *is* our Constitution! That is why the Parties choose their leader, who becomes the PM if he can get the active or passive support of most of the MPs, who are elected by normal constituents. The Public do not get to vote for the PM, that would be the American system where the Leader of the Executive is chosen separately from the Legislature. They are called "Presidents". We have "Prime Ministers", who are from the Legislature (Parliament), chosen by the whole Parliament (the MPs) to lead them.

    the Public may vote Tory to elect David Cameron, only to have him unseated as Conservative Leader - and thus PM - by Daniel Hannon, for example! (LMAO! - ...perhaps to win the UKIP vote?!? :D) Then the Nation would still have a Conservative Govt, without the same Prime Minister 'elected', without a General Election, or 'PM election' by the People. Just as Gordon Brown became PM after Tony Blair resigned. We do not vote for the leader - we vote for people we think will *support* the leader we would choose, or the person we think will best support the constituency. Or their own needs particularly.

    This is part of our Constitution - you vote for the constituency candidates, who then choose amongst them for the best to Lead. This has, of course, been somewhat distorted by the more recent 'Party' concept. This would be weakened by having 'weak' party list controls in whatever system proposed, to limit Central Party control over the choices facing the voters.. giving the voters themselves more choice over who represents them.

    --redwood will almost certainly start demanding, - spreading fear about "cuts". The fear the Tories are using, are almost identical to the Fear that was used about '''terrorism''''. [i was wrong about this, it was a guess before he started talking.]

    [however, from what he DID say...] so the two-party "argument", is going to be based upon a "referendum or not" of "AV", when actually AV is not desirable anyway, to hide discussion about PR from the Public. Clever little bleepers, aren't 'they'?? :/

    --we are going to NEED regional, 'development currencies', not tied to the external markets. For the same reasons, the Greeks could consider reintroducing the drachma, as a local regional currency not tied to international markets. Now the EU Central Bank is "experimenting with" 'Quantitative Easing' (something i would suspect the largest number of Germans who know their own history are likely somewhat 'skeptical' of), a currency tied to actual production and services in an area instead of being over-inflated on international markets could possibly be a good idea. Just guessing. Lewis in Sussex, (MP Norman Baker, for the LibDems), tried it recently. Its not such a wild concept, and with high volatility of currency markets, can give local stability if necessary. Doesn't mean the death of Sterling or the Euro, just there is perhaps place for more local currencies alongside?"

    Indy: opened your voting systems page, bit tired tonight but will read tomo, prob need a refresher on current terms. :)

    JA: on the ball.

    missed the last couple of days, will try to back catch up tomorrow."

    --can you say directly if "bleep" is a swear word in your eyes, please Aunty? :/

  • Comment number 45.



    Thank you for the link but I can't see any evidence in it of Jeremy being friends with Mandy at all.

    First of all it was in 1999 at which time, prior to the programme they may have been on relatively friendly terms but from what I understand Jeremy is on friendly terms of this sort with politicians of other persuasions.

    For instance, when I attended the Gala Dinner in April last year in his honour Jeremy and Michael Howard, the most renown of Jeremy's Newsnight 'victims' seemed to be getting on famously well with Michael Howard giving a very upbeat speech about the 'ferocious inquisitor'. Jeremy had sent him a bottle of champagne and ended up visiting Mr Howard at home.

    I shall not stop until the whole truth about Mandy's and gnu's 'experiment' of trying to turn a female into a sex and malleable political robot has been fully exposed.


  • Comment number 46.

    #45 addendum

    Having said all that I 'appreciate' how Jeremy may have found himself involved in the whole 'affair' but as I said at #38, I've been giving him a large margin of error for his own sake even more than my own.


  • Comment number 47.

    Thought Christine Lagarde correct - its not a bail-out, its a delusion and it seems she could be one of the deluded. The countries involved in this are on the point of bankruptcy - the most prominent being the US backed by China which is reckoned to also be on the road to melt down.

    Kirsty gets the brownie points from yesterday, strikingly precise and clean lines - looking at her made the stress of my afternoon at hospital a little more bearable.

    Gold took a bit of a hit yesterday but came back.

    The Sun remains low in activity very few sun spots for quite some time now - even less than over winter - note the cool weather for time of year.

  • Comment number 48.


    #35 Barriesingleton

    Thanks for fleshing out the real issues in my addled brain.

    It would be interesting (to me at least) to get some stats on exactly why a large proportion of the population voted as they did. I suspect an awful lot were 'anyone but.......(delete as appropriate), and the 'Lib Dem is a wasted vote' among others. I certainly don't know anyone who VOTED for a HUNG PARLIAMENT, though the notion is beginning to grow on me!

    At the moment, all I can see, in a fog of worry and stress at my sons hospital bedside, is a bunch of prostitutes and clients.

    What was Churchills famous phrase 'Madam, we have already asserted WHAT you are, now we are merely haggling over the price'

    Which reminds me of another financial question. Do all of the pundits, analysts and 'experts' wheeled in and out of tv studios, couches and lawns get paid?

    p.s. Isn't mobile broadband wonderful. The only good thing this week has been that I purchased it three weeks ago for business and it has been a lifeline since Election Night.

    p p.s Don't anyone mention the NHS. I may be tempted to write an essay!

    p.p.p.s If reports from yesterday are correct, Happy Birthday Jeremy. You mingle NOT be perfect, heaven forbid, but 'haste ye back.'

  • Comment number 49.

    Goode edition tonight with a whole slew of successful interviews and I even found myself briefly warming to the curiously boyish looking Micky Gove until he oozed the adverb 'seductively' describing Kirsty's straightforward questions about the small mattter of a £17 billion tax give away the Conservatives now propose and confirming my instinct there's something profoundly wrong with the man empathy wise.

    I noticed Paul Mason predicting trouble down't markets today. What's his source? Why does he say that? It's not my position nor my expectation. I should imagine sterling strengthening today as traders close short positions although the main point as always is that predicting the day to day direction of the markets is a fool's game which Paul certainly knows. So why does he continue to do it Sun tabloid front page style? It amounts to a bias in Newsnight's reporting and it is something that really does need consideration and attention.

    And incidentally it's becoming clear that Barclays Capital (London) is emerging as main culprit for the mayhem in the global markets on election day Thursday. Well now there's a thing ... too much to hope someone on the editorial team following that up?

  • Comment number 50.

    Kirsty isn't really powerful but she certainly has a quality. Harman's time is about to be over. Margret Cole of the FSA is probably the women using power the most at the moment. But it remains to be seen if she will seriously engage the big boys. I await her actions on HSBC. But if you really want to get into power play; Blythe Masters came up with Credit Default Swaps - really instigated 'something' but for her those pointing the blame are like 'poor work men blaming their tools'.

  • Comment number 51.


    He was the chap who saved the world by applying his 'legendary' ('an unverified story, handed down through time') unmatched skill in matters financial.

    Oh - it's all going terribly well.

  • Comment number 52.


    A refreshiigly insightful post.


    Who were the woe-men
    The woe-men of England?
    They’re women turned woe-men
    Once women of England.
    Grudged were the kids they bore
    They’d rather gone to war
    Derelict courage brings no honour to England.

  • Comment number 53.

    Jim Rickards view on recent developments:-

    In the video he gets at how 'shorts' can 'take out' whole countries and alludes to 25% unemployment even if it succeeds. His own view is that it will fail and for him that means hyper-inflation.


BBC © 2014 The BBC is not responsible for the content of external sites. Read more.

This page is best viewed in an up-to-date web browser with style sheets (CSS) enabled. While you will be able to view the content of this page in your current browser, you will not be able to get the full visual experience. Please consider upgrading your browser software or enabling style sheets (CSS) if you are able to do so.