The debates should be scrapped

The "candidates' debate" is a long-standing part of American political culture, noted in Simon and Garfunkel's Mrs Robinson. On Thursday the United Kingdom introduced this device into the general election campaign. Since then media coverage of the event has reached hysterical levels.

Later on Thursday evening on Andrew Neil's This Week the most interesting analysis came from James Purnell, but he mumbled so much that his points were often overlooked, especially as the other people in the studio were talking over him.



On Friday the newspapers were full of the debate and the effect it seems to have had on voting intentions. Lots of commentators kept saying it was good for democracy (when what they really mean is that it was good for the media). Nick Robinson on the Today programme effectively said that Cameron was mad to have agreed to participate (since the British public will always support an underdog). On Channel 4 News Krishnan Guru-Murthy chaired a panel that completely deconstructed the debate - "Leadership Consultant" Ruby Wax (ridiculously over-dressed, as if she was Margot Channing in All About Eve) clicking her fingers and spouting psycho-babble. On Newsnight Emily Maitlis frowned seriously and talked about the Clegg breakthrough. The entire journalistic world seemed to be going mad.



Today Polly Toynbee soberly reminded Guardian readers that we have seen this sort of political blip before with the SDP in the 1980s. On Dateline London Janet Daley (who always gets things right) predicted that the Liberal-Democrat bounce would be a 48-hour wonder. On a Newsnight special Jeremy Paxman reminded people of the rash David Steel hubris of "go back to your constituencies and prepare for government".



But it was Tony Parsons, writing in today's Daily Mirror, who raised the one-man-band issue.

For me this is a major cause of concern. We are not electing a President in this country, therefore presidential-style leader debates must be unconstitutional. Especially if they can sway voter intentions by large percentage points. They must be unconstitutional because unlike an elected president who enjoys tenure of office (unless impeached) a party leader can be deposed by a small internal clique. Nick Clegg's immediate predecessor as Liberal-Democrat leader was ousted in mysterious circumstances (reportedly partly because he wore sock suspenders). I have lost count of the number of coup attempts against Gordon Brown, and were he to remain as Prime Minister it is likely that the plotting against him will continue.

If leaders' debates are to continue, Prime Ministers must be given security of tenure between general elections - otherwise the debates should be scrapped.

And from an advertising point of view, doesn't the experience of this debate prove the power of mainstream media as opposed to all the pro-digital garbage we have been subjected to!

Go back to your constituencies and prepare for government: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CxyQqDik2rs