It was an odd sort of a line up we saw on last night’s Telegraph/Huffington Post/Youtube EU debate. On the remain side we had two formidable politicians who – like it or not (and I suspect for many Progress readers the answer will be not) have had their turn at leading or seeking to lead their parties. On the leave side, two politicians who are clearly positioning themselves to lead theirs.
As such there were weird optics to start with. Despite it being Johnson who harked back to the days of the British empire, it felt like an odd imbalance between a clash of the politicians of a recent past and those of the near future was being presented to us from the get go.
I am a Labour member and a firm and decidedly worried supporter of us remaining in the EU. But I tried to watch the debate dispassionately. To place myself in the role of the undecided audience desperately hoping for some clarity; for a moment of revelation over how they should vote. I would like these debates to make a real difference as I genuinely believe the fact are on my side.
In these terms I would say that Alex Salmond had the moment of the night. His forcing Boris Johnson to admit he had not read the Bank of England report he was trying to misuse was masterful. Were this a debating society he could happily have done the equivalent of a mic drop right there. But this is Boris, Bojo the clown. The man beloved for his befuddlement. He will be forgiven once again for winging it.
It was the women who provided alternate visions of a more positive future. Liz Kendall seemed to finally bring some of the passion about the future some other elements of the Remain campaign have been accused of missing. Priti Patel – while accusing Kendall of being negative – did something of the same for Leave. And sure to my ears it felt Pollyannaish. But I am equally sure supporters of leave will say the same for Kendall. Who convinced the floating voters we have yet to find out. Possibly no one.
The problem is that these debates are never going to provide that much needed lucidity. They aren’t designed to really – they are as much about entertainment as they are about information. And all four debaters last night knew that. They traded quips, insults and stats and talked about bananas for a ridiculous amount of their allotted time. I am sure they all passionately hoped to change someone’s mind or win over a waverer. But it all felt too much like everything else. Like the melee this campaign has become. Like the mud we all seem to be stuck in.
The audience are also wise to the reason they are there too. With the camera’s trained on you this is your chance for fame – not elucidation. Several of the ruder interruptions and questions seemed designed solely with getting a ‘you won’t believe what this audience member said to this politician’ pieces in the host Huffington Post. Look, politicians and commentators like myself who fail to take the genuine anger of the public against the whole political class should be first up against the wall when the revolution comes. But I am really starting to question how many times I ever need to hear a member of an audience who has chosen to spend an evening listening to these debates denounce the participants as all the same and all lying. Why are you there then?
Many of the audience were undecided. Much of the country is too. This is a big decision and on it a big future rests. It is less entertaining that Boris and the bananas or 15 minutes of fame. But my God it matters more.
———————————
Emma Burnell is a political blogger and campaigner
———————————