Morning Call: pick of the papers

The ten must-read comment pieces from today's papers.

1. Ed Miliband's big test is to make voters see him as prime minister The Observer

He can't do anything about the way he looks, but he can do something about the way he talks to the country, writes Andrew Rawnsley.

2. 'Likeability’ is the bane of modern politics The Sunday Telegraph

Clowning around on a chat show, or even being a devoted Dad, may count for less than having a serious grasp of economic reality, writes Janet Daley.

3. Casual vacancy for gloomy snob: would suit JK Rowling The Sunday Times (£)

The first Harry Potter story was astonishing in its minor public-school wannabe snobbery, argues Minette Marrin.

4. Israel and the Occupied Territories are much changed - yet peace seems more distant than ever The Independent on Sunday

As Donald Macintyre, the Sindy's Jerusalem correspondent, remembers eight years reporting from the region, he reflects on what has changed and what changes must still come.

5. What’s the point of Labour when the coffers are empty? The Sunday Telegraph

Ed Miliband’s answer to this question will help to decide the outcome of the next election, writes Matthew d'Ancona.

6. Wonkish? Yes, but Miliband could be PM in 2015 The Independent on Sunday

The Labour brand is strong because voters think Labour will protect their jobs, argues John Rentoul.

7. Is this the death knell for the Lib Dems? The Observer

At a time when the country needs them, the party seems intent on self-destruction, writes Nick Cohen.

8. Ed's set to bare his soul... and his inner geek The Mail on Sunday

One of Miliband’s closest allies admits the Labour leader is "not yet seen an alternative Prime Minister. He needs to be by the Election". The test of this conference is whether he is halfway to being there by the end of it, writes James Forsyth.

9. Stay vague, Ed — too red and you’re dead The Sunday Times (£)

If Miliband is wise, he will keep this stuff about responsible capitalism vague. Better Fuzzy Ed than Red Ed, writes Martin Ivens.

10. We need a revolution in how our companies are owned and run The Observer

Will Hutton calls for a culture dedicated to long-term, ethical goals.

Alex Hern is a technology reporter for the Guardian. He was formerly staff writer at the New Statesman. You should follow Alex on Twitter.

Getty
Show Hide image

The Manchester attack will define this election: Broadcasters have a careful line to tread

It's right that the government should be given a chance to respond, but they must not be allowed to use it to campaign.

Every election campaign has its story, its place in the political history of this country. 2017 will forever be known for Manchester and the horror of the attack on Britain's young; and fighting terrorism will be a theme, overt or underlying, of what we see and hear between now and polling day.

The broadcasters have covered the events comprehensively yet sensitively. But they are aware that we're in an election campaign too; and when other news drives aside the carefully-balanced campaign formats, ministerial appearances give them a dilemma.

The fact is that what the Prime Minister and Home Secretary are doing in response to Manchester is newsworthy. It was Theresa May's duty to implement the recommendations of her security advisers on the elevation of the terror alert, and it would have been unthinkable for the news channels not to broadcast her various statements.

But it is also true that, if the bomb hadn't been detonated, Tuesday would have been a day in which the PM would have been under relentless damaging scrutiny for her u-turn on social care. All the opposition parties would have been in full cry across the airwaves. Yet in the tragic circumstances we found ourselves, nobody could argue that Downing Street appearances on the terror attack should prompt equal airtime for everyone from Labour to Plaid Cymru.

There are precedents for ministers needing to step out of their party roles during a campaign, and not be counted against the stopwatch balance of coverage. Irish terrorism was a factor in previous elections and the PM or Northern Ireland secretary were able to speak on behalf of the UK government. It applied to the foot and mouth epidemic that was occupying ministers' time in 2001. Prime ministers have gone to foreign meetings before, too. Mrs Thatcher went to an economic summit in photogenic Venice with her soulmate Ronald Reagan three days before the 1987 election, to the irritation of Neil Kinnock.

There are plenty of critics who will be vigilant about any quest for party advantage in the way that Theresa May and Amber Rudd now make their TV and radio appearances; and it’s inevitable that a party arguing that it offers strength and stability will not object to being judged against these criteria in extreme and distressing times.

So it's necessary for both broadcasters and politicians to be careful, and there are some fine judgements to be made. For instance, it was completely justifiable to interview Amber Rudd about the latest information from Manchester and her annoyance with American intelligence leaks. I was less comfortable with her being asked in the same interview about the Prevent strategy, and with her response that actions would follow "after June", which edges into party territory and would be a legitimate area to seek an opposition response.

When the campaigning resumes, these challenges become even greater. Deciding when the Prime Minister is speaking for the government and nation, or when she is leader of the Conservative Party, will never be black and white. But I would expect to see the broadcast bulletins trying to draw clearer lines about what is a political report and what is the latest from Manchester or from G7. They must also resist any efforts to time ministerial pronouncements with what's convenient for the party strategists' campaign grid.

There might also usefully be more effort to report straight what the parties are saying in the final days, with less spin and tactical analysis from the correspondents. The narrative of this election has been changed by tragedy, and the best response is to let the politicians and the public engage as directly as possible in deciding what direction the nation should now take.

Roger Mosey is the Master of Selwyn College, Cambridge. He was formerly editorial director and the director of London 2012 at the BBC.

0800 7318496