The PM Glass Box.
The Glass Box is where the PM team meets in at 18.00 every weeknight to discuss the content of the programme.
We try to be honest with each other, but not hurtful, as we talk about what worked and what didn't...what met our expectations and what fell short.
This virtual glass box is where you're encouraged to take part in the same spirit. Tonight's PM editor Roger Sawyer will read your comments and may well add his own.
Listen to PM
© MMX~RS~q~RS~~RS~z~RS~03~RS~)
Comments
Sign in or register to comment.
Duck - Weed
Complain about this comment
DI_W 1, In a pond, nobody notices.
Complain about this comment
Love it. One of yours, David?
Complain about this comment
AP 3, Yep, one of mine. The box is called MOATERBOAT, but not very legible.
Complain about this comment
Incidentally, that is our garden pond. The duckweed is impossible to get rid of. As the pond, at the moment, is full of tadpoles and other life, we can't poison it.
Complain about this comment
David,
Great box. Best yet I fear?
It seems to lend itself to personal interpretation especially in the present climate. For instance these titles came to mind, MOAT....DUCKMOAT...HAVE YOU SEEN MY HOUSE?....is THIS BALMORAL?
Anyway very good...gold star.
Complain about this comment
Eddie,
Thank you for taking William Hague apart. I always feel he is one of the better of a bad bunch. But, prick the surface and ask the questions (like you did) that 'normal' people are asking and guess what? yep....exactly. Keep it up Eddie.
Complain about this comment
fJd7, Do you always call Hague 'Pr*ck the Surface' ?
Complain about this comment
That box is NOT glass!
Complain about this comment
David,
What I call them is unpostable.
Complain about this comment
William Hague.
Everyday a new list of Parliamentary MoPs who will perhaps not stand at the next General Election. Yet this constant demand to have a General Election from most sides?
I ask again. How does that work? Imagine they start another swimming race at the Olympics whilst the earlier race is still in the pool - competing.
What confusion. Who won what race? Which country's competitor was swimming say for Great Britain in which race? There were two in the pool.
We will soon have clarity - Ms Smith intends to run next time - despite todays news - - various others - Ms Hewitt - do not.
Give us that time and perhaps ALL those who do not intend to put themselves forward next time - but that time is not yet, Mr Hague.
Let David Cameron know. Although he himself mentioned a certain Cabinet member in this regard but appears not to want to wait for the answer.
Mister Clegg already knows it but you would never guess.
Mister mair - I loved the list of possible PM Interviewees that Mister Hague more than capably replaced.
Cheeky. lol
Complain about this comment
Squirrel 9, Neither is Eddie's. Might be plexiglass, however. Oddly, because of the grey/red squirrel argument, I'm working on a squirrel one.
Complain about this comment
fJd 10, As,apparently, is mine. No funny business allowed here.
Complain about this comment
I think the British public is in danger of missing a trick on Thursday.
With so much anger and despair about Westminster politicians, the Euro election results will be dismissed as a protest rather than a real vote on the issues of Europe and our membership.
Therefore all the pro-European gang will choose to ignore the true British feelings, again.
Complain about this comment
sp 11, To much duckweed in that pond for any kind of swimming.
Complain about this comment
Tbird 14, '...true British feelings...', eh?
Complain about this comment
What joy. Wee Dougie Alexander on the phone. Another of Gordon's favourites - promoted way above any competence. I also like the idea of Balls and Mandelson visiting number 10 of an evening. The way the PM is talking and reacting one wonders what they're doing in there.I leave it with you.
Complain about this comment
"OK - Why is Gordon Brown so inept?"
FANTASTIC..
Good one Eddie!
That's brightened my whole countenance.
:-D
Complain about this comment
A little thought for you. If, God forbid, you are made redundant how much would you like a little comedy tune on the news before the announcement? You are in the news business, not the comedy one. This stuff is not funny so pack it in.
When doing the news start reporting it and stop trying to create it. Questions such as "why is Gordon Brown so inept" is an attempt to provoke some kind of newsworthy reaction, not broaden public understanding of what is going on. This macho questioning style learned from old US court programmes creates little light and is part of the problem of politics. They are all so highly trained to deal with this crap that nothing of substance is ever said.
I am sure you will all sit around afterwards thinking what a great job you have done, but tenth rate comedy and fifth rate advocacy is not what the news should be about.
Complain about this comment
D_M
David
I see the Duck... But, where's the Duck Island? Don't tell me you claimed for it but never bought it..?!
Naughty!
Also, I see the "Box" is filled with a red-substance. Does that indicate a "New Labour" inclination?
Hopefully not, becuase it may go under and like a recent French owned aircraft, may be difficult to retrieve...
Complain about this comment
He's a joker, that little Billy Hague.
I don't recall him calling for a General Election when John Major succeeded Margaret Thatcher in 1990, or claiming that Major didn't go to the country because he was afraid of elections. Major waited until 1992. Then went to the last day of the following Parliament.
Just because he has a selective memory he shouldn't assume the rest of us have!
Complain about this comment
Somebody ought to remind The Independent's health bloke about the Bird Flu Crisis Drama and how we all quite failed to die then, and that although the Swine Flu Crisis Drama may be fractionally more valid (I mean, we have had more than three hundred more cases of Swine Flu than we did of Bird Flu) it is being pointed out that thousands of people are now thought to have the disease and *don't notice it*.
So maybe just maybe treating it as if it were the New Black Death might be described as "crying wolf", after last time round the Bubonic quite failed to materialise...
Complain about this comment
Who's Fernando Gonzales?
Complain about this comment
Douglas Alexander,
Still using the language of reform of, renewal of, clean up of a system that is not reformable, not renewable, not able to be cleaned up around the edges.
'You can't put new wine in old skins'
For them to see beyond clean up and tinkering at the edges, they know would be the end for them.
Complain about this comment
Whilst I'm here
I think that Esther Rantzen ought to hold fire about where she will stand until she has the list of people who have been caught dead to rights but are not planning to stop being an MP, just to stop being (as it might be) Home Secretary. One of those is who she ought to stand against, rather than standing somewhere where an MP found with trotter in till has been forced to stop being an MP at all.
Complain about this comment
fjd 24
funnyjoe
"'You can't put new wine in old skins'"
You can, as you can put new wine in old-barrels.
But, of course, "tainting" is always the issue...
Complain about this comment
C_G 25
This is most un-like you (or most likely it's me) but, could you re-word your post. I don't understand it.
Complain about this comment
CG (22)
Do you remember when I said to you, "don't worry mate its not going to happen".
See I told you.
Complain about this comment
DM (23)
"Whose Fernando Gonzales"?
Speedy's brother!
Complain about this comment
Ref 19. linustheboredcat
I agree. PM has been getting worse since Easter. It's described as: "Afternoon news and current affairs programme, reporting on breaking stories and summing up the day's headlines." It should be providing analysis to complement to the straight news read out at 18.00hrs. I've always thought these two programmes were the wrong way round, but that's a different point.
PM Team: what sort of answer do you expect to get from "Why is Gordon Brown so inept?" These are Fox News questions.
Complain about this comment
Charlie (26)
As I have heard it explained;
In biblical times wine was kept/transported in animal skins. When the wines had been used the skins would dry out and shrink. if the skins were to be used again, they would tend to burst. Thats what I heard anyway.
Yes, tainting would be the other obvious consequence.
Complain about this comment
OK - Why is Gordon Brown so inept?"
Probably the best question asked by anybody yet!
*other equally challenging questions are probably available*
Complain about this comment
What has happened to this country? What with the expenses issue and the loss of faith in our M.Ps. Though we may have talent on the Box, as a Nation we show very little kindness to our fellow human being.
Complain about this comment
Some of the posts on here baffle me. Is it trolling? Spamming? Me? (^_^)
Complain about this comment
Its got nothing to do with tonight's PM, but who else heard Cement Freud at the 6.30 comedy slot?
Absolute ruddy genius!
Are we allowed to comment on things that were not on twixt 5 and 6?
Complain about this comment
Oh "ell" That should of course be Clement!
Complain about this comment
...idiot 36
I think Sir Clement would appreciate your "Freudian" slip above all else...
Complain about this comment
Richard_SM @30
What sort of answer do you expect to get from "Why is Gordon Brown so inept?"
The Fox News answer of course. "He has only got one eye on the Ball".
I know. Unforgivable. At least the answer is as dire as the question.
Complain about this comment
"Why is Gordon Brown so inept?"
Lets face it this is the question floating round at the back of the UK population's mind after they've listened to the news headlines.
Eddie you are my hero.
Complain about this comment
Chris (22) and fjd (28) there is a difference between predicting a pandemic and saying 'we're doomed, I tell ye, we're doomed!'
As I understand it we already have conditions approaching a pandemic with this H1N1 flu in that it is a new virus, spreads easily between people, and is present in many countries across the world. In the 1918 Spanish flu there was a pandemic with millions of deaths. So far this time deaths have been no more (possibly less) than with normal winter flu.
However, this is the first time we have ever been able to track a pandemic from its very early beginnings. This has the advantage that it should make us better prepared if the virus does become more virulent. But it is too early to assume that because cases so far have been mild that they will remain so. I'm not doing a Private Frazer, just sounding a note of caution - epidemics and pandemics have been part of human history and will always be so.
The other main reason for being prepared as a country, is that even mild flu if it affects enough people at any one time could have a serious effect on services - NHS, utilities, even heaven forefend on BBC broadcasting.
So I for one am glad that PM and others are continuing to keep an eye on the situation.
Complain about this comment
Charlie @ 27
"C_G 25, This is most un-like you (or most likely it's me) but, could you re-word your post. I don't understand it."
I was trying quite hard not to name names and get modded, so it was probably me being even more than usually confused.
What I meant was, Esther Rantzen has said she might stand in a couple of places, but the ones she has named may now have the people she objected to deselected so there would be little or no point in her standing there against people who are not pig-in-troughing it.
Perhaps she ought to wait until she can be sure of standing against someone who has decided to try to go on being an MP in spite of having been shown up as perhaps overdoing the expenses claims a bit. (no names no pack-drill)
fJd @ 28 wrote:
"Do you remember when I said to you, "don't worry mate its not going to happen".
"See I told you."
Oh, I agreed at the time and agree now. I think it has been a huge wolf-shouting exercise, so far at least.
Complain about this comment
C_G 41
Thanks for that.
A pure guess, but I think she'll stand in a place she's already named.
We shall see. Frankly, I'd also like to see Joanna Lumley stand as well... Oh, and Martin Bell (again) if he could be persuaded...
Complain about this comment
Anne P @ 40, at the moment, though, the main thing we have to fear is fear itself.
Of recent years, whipping up frenzy has been really quite common -- the worst example might be the "MMR Jab Causes Autism" rubbish. I would really rather not be told all the time that I ought to be in a state of constant panic about *Them* or *It*; it reminds me very much of "Nineteen Eighty-Four" or the ants in T.H. White's "The Sword in the Stone" being distracted from what the government is up to by being offered Terrible Threats To The Citizens Of Airstrip One. I don't think the media are in cahoots with the government on this (that would be paranoid of me) but I do think that the papers at least are becoming more and more determioned to try to keep their sales up, and there is nothing like a good panic-story for boosting sales.
Kill all badgers, they might carry TB (not that any human is going to catch it from them or even from the cows, but kill them all anyway); kill all birds entering the country; kill all pigs (well, one country started to do that, didn't it?); and so on and on. It irritates me.
Complain about this comment
Chris, I think your (justifiable) irritation indicates a serious need for much better science education, especially among journalists and politicians.
The question of why we all enjoy a good scare story - think of how popular certain genres of film are - apart from editors of papers thinking they will sell more copies is one for further investigation. Scientific of course.
Complain about this comment
I remember hearing on Today at the end of last week that as of then, 75 MPs had decided not to contest the next election for various reasons (including the ubiquitous "to spend more time with my family"). Anyone care to guess how many it will be by the time the Telegraph has finished examining its copy of the expense claims CD-R?
Unsurprisingly, Wikipedians have created an article to summarise the ensuing fun and games (as I write, 14 MPs have announced their intention to stand down as a result of the disclosures - 8 Conservative and 6 Labour): the article's called "Disclosure of expenses of Members of the United Kingdom Parliament" (although you might find it easier by searching the site for "uk expenses" - it's the top result).
Apparently they're allowed to claim up to £400/month on food... I wish my employers would allow me to do that...then again, doing so probably wouldn't be too good for my waistline... :)
Complain about this comment
Anne P @ 44, it doesn't even have to be science education, just education in the scientific method, I think. Scientific method is as important in the arts as it is in the sciences, after all. Judging data properly has a place in both, certainly.
Yes, I agree with you.
mittfh @ 45, 400 quid a month is what, just over thirteen quid a day, which is quite enough if one is cooking at home but not a vast amount if one is eating out, I suppose.
Complain about this comment
Chris @ 46 - depends what you're eating, of course :)
It would be interesting to know which meal(s) the allowance was intended for - since most non-politicians are expected to pay for their food themselves (unless attending an all-day course, in which case lunch is included in the cost).
Assuming it's intended for lunches, £18/day (assuming working week of 5 days) would probably cover an ordinary pub lunch + drink for them. (Well, around my bit of the country, you'd have change from Â10, but London's probably more expensive - but given the background of some MPs, they'd probably prefer meals costing significantly more than £18!)
Complain about this comment
This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.
Does Eddie try to insult guests and listeners or does it just come naturally? His 'interview' with Douglas Alexander was disgraceful - primarily because he didn't seem to have any interest in helping to inform listeners, just make some petty points about ministers being made available and get a hearty slap on the back from those who like the PM in-jokes for the most disrespectful wuestion I think I've ever heard in a 'serious interview'.
He keeps pratting on about "iPM, the programme that starts with its listeners"; it's clear Mair doesn't care about them.
Complain about this comment
TrevorG74
I think you may be missing the point. When you are talking to a government minister about the wheels falling off the government, the way the government communicates with the people is a key issue.
Alexander's attempts to blame technology/meetings/whatever spoke volumes about this government's grip on reality.
And the star question - why is Gordon Brown so inept? - is surely one that we'd all like answered?
Complain about this comment
Sid,
Even if that is the question we all want answered, it was never actually going to get an answer about the PM's competence. It was just an insulting invite to say how Mr Brown is the best man for the job. No attempt to engage the guest in a discussion that might lead to some challenging questions.
IMHO.
Complain about this comment
Charlie 20, There are two ducks. The red stuff is another shipment of red rubber bands. Duck Island is just out of camera range.
Complain about this comment
fJd 29, Sorry, I got it wrong. It is spelled Gonzalez. I spelled it the British way.
Complain about this comment
fJd 31, You are correct.
Complain about this comment
Hello All...
Thank you for taking the time to post. Quite some day, with resignations and standings-down seeming to pop up every minute. It was a real struggle to get people to talk though... and the producers did a sterling job bashing the phones to try to get some response. I expect it will be more of the same today.
It was Eddie's rather witty empty chair - the long list of names of people we'd contacted who either did not want to be interviewed or who did not get back to us - that seemed to do the trick. We got a call during the programme to tell us that Douglas Alexander would be making his way to a land line to talk to us.
That meant we had to reshape the programme rather drastically in the second half and - as we were live on air when we found out we going to get Douglas Alexander - there was not time for us to sit down as an editorial team to plot how we should tackle the interview. Communication between me and Eddie had to fit around a programme with lots of live elements and with my having to speak to Douglas Alexander's people while we were on air.
Reaction to the interview here on the blog and in email traffic has been mixed, with some people objecting to the initial questions about process (why we had not had responses about interview requests) and others disliking the initial question about Gordon Brown being inept. Others, however, thought it was inspired.
First of all, the questions about process were to try to illustrate the confusion yesterday surrounding communication between us and the Government/Labour. Secondly, with the question about ineptitude, it's worth noting that Douglas Alexander engaged with the question rather than dismissing it.
There is more than one way to conduct an interview - different styles are used at different times, depending on the circumstance and depending on what has gone on before during interviews... That day and on previous days. We live in interesting times, but many interviews we see/hear involve the parroting of duck-billed platitudes. We all try very hard to make sure we get interviews that do not end up with our being fobbed off and I think Eddie's line of questioning, given our late knowledge of the interview and the fact we were somewhat squeezed because of that, was apposite.
I know some of you will disagree.
I am sorry about mixing parrots and ducks.
All the best...
Rog
Complain about this comment
mittfh @ 47, indeed. But then, all these people seem to have homes, many of them several homes, and I assume have fridges, so they do have a choice between say buying two slices of bread with two slices of processed ham and a bit of pickle for call-it-2.50 (six sandwiches costing 15 quid) or buying a loaf of bread for 1.09, twelve slices of processed ham for 2.45, and using them over three days to make six sandwiches for call-it-four-quid including the pickles and butter. And they'd have some bread left over to feed the ducks with, or if they really didn't want to waste it they could put it into the oven to go crisp while they were cooking other things, or have toast for breakfast.
I'm not saying that MPs shouldn't use the House of Commons canteens, where they probably pay rather less than that for a sandwich given that HoC canteens are about a third as expensive as comparable food in any other eatery in the area. But that makes it worse, doesn't it. Bother.
I don't really think that they wouldn't eat if they weren't MPs, though, so the whole thing is a ramp. I wouldn't mind being given four thousand eight hundred pounds a year to buy something I would have been buying anyway.
Complain about this comment
Squirrel 9, And you're not a squirrel.
Complain about this comment
DMcN @ 57, maybe s/he is a ten-foot-tall faster-than-light-travelling squirrel -- we would never know, would we?
Complain about this comment
C_G 58
Nuts..!
Complain about this comment
Charlie @59..
Do you you mean "Rats..!" ?
Complain about this comment
C_G 58, A bit like Rocky and Bullwinkle?
Squirrel 69, I think he meant 'nuts' because squirrels eat nuts.
Complain about this comment
View these comments in RSS