The Staggers

The New Statesman’s rolling politics blog

The first TV leaders’ debate: one year on

How the debates changed British politics for ever.

By George Eaton Published 15 April 2011 18:38

It's a year to the day since the first TV leaders' debate, the event that transformed Nick Clegg from the little-known leader of the Liberal Democrats into the head of a revolt against the Labour-Tory duopoly. At the start of the election campaign, journalists were fond of asking, "Who's that man with Vince Cable?" It was a question we never heard after 15 April 2010.

"Cleggmania" would not last, and the Lib Dem leader has since squandered much goodwill by reversing his stance on spending cuts, the VAT rise and tuition fees, but the debates still changed British politics in important ways. They institutionalised three-party politics, making hung parliaments more likely in the future. And, by forcing the Conservatives to fight a war on two fronts, they helped prevent a Tory majority.

David Cameron's decision to agree to the three-way leaders' debates (under significant pressure from the Murdoch empire) is now widely acknowledged as one of his biggest mistakes. Nigel Lawson, for instance, recently said:

They should have got an overall majority and they didn't because they made a number of mistakes. One was agreeing to the three-way television debates. There was no way the country was going to elect Nick Clegg, so it should have been simply between Cameron and Brown.

But Clegg's success also cost the Lib Dems, as activists hubristically campaigned in unwinnable seats and neglected key marginals. The party won just 57 seats, five fewer than in 2005.

Not many now remember Cameron's warning that the debates might be "slow and sluggish". In fact, they were far less stilted and stage-managed than those in the United States. A general election campaign without them is now unthinkable. They will, I fear, hugely increase the presidentialisation of British politics, but in a modern democracy, voters both deserve and expect a live debate between the party leaders.

Special Offer: Get 12 issues of New Statesman magazine for just £12

Tags: Nick Clegg David Cameron Gordon Brown

More from George Eaton

12 comments

Fri, 2011-04-15 19:02 — Graeme (not verified)

The "debates" were a farce. They completely misled the public in so many ways. Maybe they will be put on again, but we won't be so easily fooled.

Fri, 2011-04-15 19:03 — Marcus (not verified)

I suspect they are here to stay for one reason: both Cameron and Clegg will expect to outperform the awkward Ed Miliband in any debate.

That is, if Miliband is still the leader by the time of the election.

Fri, 2011-04-15 19:31 — Matt Hurst (not verified)

The Liberal Democrats and The Tories are going have to appear different.

That plays into Labour's hand. And if AV comes into play then Lucas will probably call for her chance in the spotlight.

Sat, 2011-04-16 16:04 — Hamish (not verified)

@Gracie

You can hardly use Miliband's lack of broken promises as a strong point for him, all that shows is he has no experience. The party he's representing has even more broken promises than the other two parties combined.

Fri, 2011-04-15 19:56 — Andrew (not verified)

I agree with Marcus. I am not sure Ed Miliband will do well when you consider that Cameron and Clegg are unlikely to be too critical of eachother unless something catastrophic happens to the coalition.

Instead of a leader's debate, maybe they should have Bob Holness back and use the "Blockbusters" format. It will truly be two against one.

Fri, 2011-04-15 20:00 — Andrew (not verified)

@Graeme - I did not witness the debate so I am not sure what you mean by misleading the public. That said, I think its better to have a debate as opposed to simply all of the photo-ops that are used to build election campaigns.

What often spoils these debates is the post-debate focus on the minutia rather than substance. That's up to the media rather than the politicians but its usually the post-debate analysis that creates things like Cleggmania. Overall, I'd rather have them than not.

Fri, 2011-04-15 20:39 — swatantra nandanwar

Debates were good and useful and ground breaking. Thanks to Brown they went ahead, and in a way Brown managed to rally some support back to Labour. The defeat was not a meltdown, but a relatively modest defeat. 'I agree with Nick' became a catchphrase. Of the Moderators Stewart was excellent, Boulton good and Dimbleby poor. Next time, expect a contrived falling out between Clegg and Cameron coming up to the election. But the talk will be on what the make up of the Coalition in 2015 is going to be because no Party is going to win it outright.
Lucas has no right to demand to appear neither have the BNP.

Fri, 2011-04-15 20:48 — matthew fox (not verified)

I think Ed Miliband would relish the TV debates, Clegg will cry and complain that he is being used as a punchbag.

Fri, 2011-04-15 21:15 — Livers (not verified)

Would be interesting to review the transcripts and see how many of the promises and denials from each of the 3 leaders turned out to be truthfull...

Fri, 2011-04-15 22:31 — 9xzulug

THE TV ELECTION DEBATE HAD A PROFOUND ON THE ELECTORATE DUE TO THE FACT WE HEARD WHAT THE LEADERS SAID/PROMISED ETC,INSTEAD OF READING WHAT THE PAPERS WROTE WHO WE ALL KNOW MANIPULATE INFO DEPENDANT ON WHO THEY SIDE WITH HENCE MORE TRANSPARENCY WAS ACHIEVED.i dare say in future debates the leaders will be more apprehensive to disclose or answer questions,take for instance nick clegg,don't promise what you can't deliver!I HOPE THE TV ELECTION DEBATES ARE HERE TO STAY,IT FORCED THE ELECTORATE TO ENGAGE WITH POLITICS

Sat, 2011-04-16 00:48 — Gracie

Through the debates Clegg was given a once in a lifetime opportunity to really prove his credentials as a person and a leader and he failed abysmally. He has managed to lose all his left leaning support which he will never be able to win back, in fact he more or less told the left of his party their voted were no longer required.
Cameron is exposed for the lying PR con man spiv he is and the coalition government is made up out of feckless idiot millionaires. They have been a complete disaster for this country. If we have more leadership debates, Ed Miliband by comparison will shine through.
I see some people on here are still totally underestimating Ed Miliband and that is very good news for labour and Miliband himself, who has proved himself to be a bit of a winner, come the May elections this may be proved even more. Clegg and Cameron have every single reason to fear Miliband, in addition Ed is an excellent orator and his leadership credentials are beginning to emerge. He comes across as calm, honest and trustworthy and he unlike Cameron and Crybaby Clegg, will not have a string of lies and broken promises behind him. ed Miliband will be spoiled for choice.