´óÏó´«Ã½

Do you think they can widen the appeal of a candidate or should they adopt a low profile?

It depends on the candidate OWN wishes since, the person needs to make an inform decision on bringing a spouse on the campaign trail or not and on the opposite side, having a low profile will not bring out many "guests" to the election rallies....

[NB: I am not advocating and/or affiliated in the political system in the United Kingdom.]

(Dennis Junior)

Should politicians' partners take part in election campaigns

As of course, it is my own opinion and, not as part of any political party operative....Yes, politicans' partners should be encourage to take part in campaigns to allow them the "lime-light" to the media and the public....

(Dennis Junior)

In the 1987 General Election a tory candidate won as my MP. He had pushed through my letterbox a pamphlet that stated he was married and his wife supported his attempt to be my MP. That was all no photograph, just a simple paragraph.

He became my MP (without my vote - I met him!) and withing six months announced his divorce from his wife on the grounds of her adultary. He must have known of this when he campaigned.

I believe the general public is not interested in politicians wives as much as the tabloid press are. You get one reasonably attractive woman and she's all over the place, fashion, cooking, bringing up kids, there is nothing they are not asked to comment on. Yet, get a plain, unattractive, older wife and she is invisible. We are not fooled.

If I went to a job interview and they asked me about my wife I would be indignant, it has nothing to do with my ability to do a job of work.

That depends entirely on the partner. If the partner has anything useful to contribute, he or she should not be prevented from doing so just by virtue of being a partner.

If the partner has nothing useful to contribute, then it's probably best to stay out of things.

I've a feeling they should keep out of the limelight. Are they just clones or what happens if they don't share their partner's views? Not everybody has a partner !

In all of life families should support each other and the saying that behind every successful man their is a good woman is true. Why shouldn't a wife do evrything she can to support her husband and vice versa. Help not use is what I agree with - Gordon Brown has pushed his wife into awkward spots to take the heat from him and it just makes him look weak and ineffective.

Unless they're standing for election they should keep their mouths shut and leave their partners to get on with the job in hand. It's bad enough that politics has become little more than a PR exercise in our celebrity obsessed nation, the last thing we need is Cameron, Brown or Clegg's wives getting in on the act too.

Not important at all in any way shape or form! Listen, MPs, potential PMs and the rest of the political cliques. We do not want to know about the intimate details of your personal lives - unless you are involved in morally bankrupt, corrupt and incompetent practices in your personal as well as your public life! Just get on with the Election, tell us all your policies, tell us what particular flavour of the doctrine of sacrifice you are preaching this year/decade/century - And let the irrational believers of your abilities as saviours, vote for which ever particular bribe, illusion or future benefit they desire this year/decade/century! You are all fake saints and saviour and showing us you are normal family people does not change the fact! Just get on with the Election Please - most of us have already chosen never to vote for you parasites anyhow!

If they want to assist in the campaign, fine there is no reason to stop them. If they want greater involvement they should run for office.

In reality a wife or husbands involvement shows the politician in a slightly more 'human' light, something some struggle to do otherwise (GB!), there is however always the potential down side - once the 'box is opened' the partner's private life, financial dealing and every utterence are fair game in the public arena.

In today's World of sound bites, tweets and facebook, Politicians and their wives need to be media savvy and attractive. Whilst it should not be important, unfortunately it is. As far as most young people are concerned, we can forget what their policies are, because it is the same old stuff for all of them. The days of the wide differences of polical views between Labour and Conversative is over. Tony Blair put paid to that when he occupied the middle ground rather than the left.

Politicians spouses regardless of whether or not they campaign for or with the spouse seeking office often times do have a propensity for influencing the spouse's career. Like it or not, the public is interested in the lives of those running and the tabloid journalistic approach of modern media feeds it. That is one reason to have the spouse on the campaign, the other reason is, that spouses influence the other's decision making process. I want to see and hear how that acts and thinks. Like it or not, that person will impact government, even passively.

I have no objection whatsoever if Mrs Cameron wants to help her husband as its in her interest.
If David Cameron fails to win, no doubt he will be another line of Conservative leaders that will have failed to get the top job.

"David Cameron has said his wife wants to help him on the election campaign trail."

Let`s be honest here.

Cameron needs all the help he can muster, he`s clueless and jumps on more band`wagons` than the American Indian did.

How important are politicians' partners?

Personally, to me a politicians partner is a complete irrelevence.

In fact their participation can actually confuse matters. Whenever I see a politician on telly with his wife, or worse still his kids, my first reaction is to wonder what wrongdoing they are about to apologise for.

I am not in favour of this.
My vote for a politician is based on the politician's qualifications, experience and the party's manifesto. It is not based on his or her partner.
Nor am I in favour of politician's appearing in American-style chat shows! Good grief, whatever next? David Cameron in Big Brother?!

Arm-candy of either gender is totally irrelevant. As are our mps, thinking about it....

As long as the partner is 'volunteering' to help and has the ability to do so then I see nothing wrong with them supporting their spouse providing there is no payments involved.

I suppose it would be better than taking his mistress on the campaign trail with him.

Politicians should be voted for on the basis of their policy not their choice of life partner. We are far too fond lately of delving into peoples private lives instead of the contribution they are making to society.

I think they should keep out of it, we are interested in what a candidate says he or she will do, not their partner, children and dog.

It would be highly hilarious if 'Blackpool' Piers Morgan were to do an interview with a candidates spouse only for the public to discover they were intending to vote for another party and did not agree with their husbands/wives political beliefs, thought the spouses Party was rubbish and policies unworkable! Now that would be more like the reality of the average married couple! And far more entertaining!

I do not care about their private lives and I don't think we should have their wives/husbands/partners inflicted on us everytime there is an election or they get themselves in trouble and the ever faithful partner is wheeled out to give them public support .

"Mr Cameron said his wife had told him she was ready to help him in whatever way she could and wants to "get out there" when the election is called.
Gordon Brown's wife, Sarah, has adopted a higher profile in recent years, introducing her husband before each of his past two party conference speeches."

I am sorry if I appear synical, but wasn't it David Cameron who poked fun at Gordon Brown when Sarah spoke at the Labour party conferences, saying that Gordon was only using her for political gain. And wasn't it David Cameron (amongst others) who did the same to Gordon Brown when he appeared on TV with Piers Morgan (even though he received sympathy from the general public when his son died). What a hypocrite.

I don't mind at all if a party leader wants their spouse/partner to help them in their election campaigns, but what I do mind is the sniping and torrid comments that they hurl at each other.

As all potential PM's partners are female, then they will be picked to pieces right up to election night.

Plus, as 'The Sun' newspaper publicly declared its support for the Conservative Party last year, one can only imagine?

Has anyone noticed that Kelvin Mackenzie is all over television like a red-top rash lately? Is there a pattern emerging here?

PS. Don't 'do' Twitter as it is being 'driven' for the wrong reasons? For those reason alone, I would hesitate to vote for a PM with a partner with a propensity to believe that Twitter is helpful to any part of the 'average' population?

I have no objections to politcians’ other halfs supporting their partners’ campaigns. They have a right as anyone else to voice their opinion, and to campaign on behalf of whoever they like.

But with all due respect for Mrs Cameron and Mrs Brown, I really don’t think there is even a remote chance that either of them is going to fix the economy or bring peace to Afghanistan. So I would suggest people vote for someone who can run the country, not for someone whose wife is nice.

Doesn't matter much. They're all just salesmen wanting you to pick their product over the identical product of their competitors.

One day hopefully people will wake up to the con-job that is modern democracy. The idea that you "have your say" when you add your vote to the pile of 30 million others is absurd.

The only ones with any say are the international influences with the financial muscle to quietly force politicians to do what they say just so to enable the balancing of books. That's why we have mass-immigration, ever-further EU integration, invasions and all the other polices no-one votes for, never appear in a manifesto, but just seem to get implemented by every successive government anyway.

All covered over by us periodically voting out one "incompetent" name to replaced with another name who will keep pursuing the exact same policies.

I think it is ridiculous that we are going down the line of a presidential campaign. This is not the USA. We are NOT electing a president and a 'first lady'! We ARE electing parties with political ideologies and policies. The planned debates to the exclusion of all others by the Tories, Labour and Lib Dems is a disgrace to democracy, along with the 'beauty parade' farce of the leaders wives. Are we playing political X-Factor now? It makes me sick and I hope the rest of the population shares my viewpoint. End this garbage now!

Surely this is a matter for the candidate's spouse to decide. If they have the time and the inclination to campaign, then by all means get stuck in... but if they have other commitments (job, family or whatever) or just don't like the circus that's a major campaign, it should not be held against the candidate.

I'll be looking for a clear vision of how the country should develop over the life of the next parliament and beyond, and how this ought to take place and how it will be funded - but it's immaterial whether the candidate, the candidate's spouse or any other campaign staffer tell me!

Let's see the wives! - you can tell a lot about a person from their partner. But is it just me who thinks the calibre of the partners often seems higher than that of their political spouse?

I think it's important that politicians if they are married to take their wives with them, especially on international occasions like visits to America. The American president has his wife present and many other countries and the presidents and prime ministers are escorted by their wives which is only proper I feel.

Politicians are just people the same as you and me who walked the streets, eat food, pay income tax. They are not gods they are only folk, and have the same insecurities and fears as everybody else. To be escorted by your wife so you can discuss things with that are not political but social to the occasion I think it's a good thing.

After 47 years of marriage I would say to every husband "Listen to your wife

Obviously a politicians spouse is important... as with the rest of us we spend a great deal of time with our other halves and they influence how we behave.

HOWEVER we do not elect our PM's spouses (we barely elect our PM's.... ) so I much prefer the Denis Thatcher type of partner who quietly influences the PM at home rather than the Cherie Blair type who think they're deputy PM. Her comment about 'if she was a Palestinian she'd maybe be a suicide bomber too' was not helpful.

This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the house rules. Explain.

I'm not bothered about politicians' partners. When I cast a vote in an election, local or general, the spouse, partner or significant other of the MP or councillor isn't really the first thing on my mind. What does the partner have to do with how well the politician can do his or her job?

The recent trend towards more emphasis on an MPs wife is indicative of the trivialising of politics. Thatcher was once asked what she would want as her lasting political legacy, she replied when all political parties in the UK were pro-capitalist as in the US. Blair with his NuLabor stance delivered her legacy.
We now are now seeing the americanisation of our politics, where elections are not about a contest of ideas but are becoming popularity contests.
Maybe after the televised debates between the leaders there should be a swimsuit section for their wives.

politics is all about show with no substance, sadly the media including the bbc is happy with this as it can fill news space.
The media should only have a passing interest in partners to politicians, what should be examined and followed up is the politicians policies and how they would fulfill those policies. eg how will the tories and labour manage to make all the savings, how will they mitigate the effects of those cuts for example unemployment.

No, I couldnt care less about MP's wifes, husbands or private life. So long as they do a good job and dont break the law i couldnt care if they were married or not.

I agree with other contributors, it depends on the partnership.

Clegg’s unveiled the Lib Dem’s new slogan today, and also the Lib Dem’s secret weapon in Kent, Anna Span. Perhaps she’ll be disillusioned with her new role because, from a brief search on Google, it appears she’s used to dealing with upright members.

Clegg’s boast about former partners and his choice of members may lead to him becoming a butt of jokes rather than a credible leader. Perhaps Anna will emerge as leader in a well hung parliament...

"How important are politicians' partners?"
In private, as important as anyone else's. Unfortunately, politics is morphing into an American-style celebfest and it is rather sickening to watch; so I don't.

Eh? What on earth do they have to do with politics? This upcoming election is turning into a very tasteless and irrelevant media circus which would be more at home in the USA.
What next? Getting the kids involved?

British politics and politicians have lost the plot altogether.
For goodness sake, get back to being politicians, and stop being media whores!

I would be far happier if politicians concentrated on policy, instead of this never-ending popularity contest. I don't even know why they bother, most politicians have the charisma of a dung beetle.

I don't get it. Surely what we want to know is what policies a candidate has, and the likelihood that they will enact them. What has their wife or husband got to do with it? This is all froth, not substance. Is this what Britain wants?

It's bad enough having to put up with the politicians themselves without paying homage to their kith and kin.

Just get on with the job and stop posturing with your family - that's the advice I would give them. It makes no difference to me who they are married to - it is their stance on issues that affect me and this country that are my main concern.

Seems to be just another case of following where America has lead. Why oh why do we shadow what they do - even when it is a patently bad idea?

I do not see what the problem is why shouldn't his wife support and help him? If he was not an MP this question would have been greeted with derision instead of being regarded as a legitimate issue.

I find it extremely worrying that anyone would vote for a candidate because of the attributes of their spouse!! Surely their policies and ability to do their job are more important? MPs are not celebrities - they have a serious job to do. It is important for a family to support each other but it should be behind the scenes.

People in all walks of life take support from their spouses or partners. Certainly a person who was up for election would be supported by their partner. Why should they have to keep them out of the limelight? It isn't as if they were utterly seperated from the proceedings, and the person who supports them in the run up to the election is likely to be the person that supports them once they are in office.

I guess political wags should do something to justify the benefits of taxpayer funded home improvements.

Best if they are separated, then they can claim a 1st and second residence each. Never forget this one.

However, on a campaign take who you want as long as we don't have to pay.

All this user's posts have been removed.Why?

Not at all, if they were how come Blair survived as PM for ten years.

Yes, why not. Let's have wives, aunts, brothers, sisters, and the neighbours if you like. You would have to do a lot more for me to consider voting. This country is a mess and you are all responsible for it.

Politicians partners are important only for the pillow talk they share with their spouses. In the public arena they should be seen and not heard - and preferably not even seen!
Maybe I should drag my wife along to my next business meeting because she gives me valuable advice - what nonsense!

This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the house rules. Explain.

This started in 1997 when Blair paraded his family in front of the cameras. we saw repeated photos of his wife in the press and Btown has carried on this tradition by giving his wife centre stage at Labour conferences.

It appears she also witters away on a certain internet site.

Samantha Cameron runs her own business and probably has much more of an insight into the world of work than the other two do.

I have no objection to her wishing to help her husband with campaigning, she seems far too intelligent to make inane comments or push herself in front of the cameras.

Yes MPs partners are important, The problem is thay should not be. Thay are unelected & should stay in the background.

I vote based on policies, not how "Hot" the politician's partner is.

If politician wives want political power they should stand for election. Having Cherie Blair guide the expansion of the Human Rights Industry was bad enough.

This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the house rules. Explain.

This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the house rules. Explain.

Politicians' partners, their dogs and children, are usually trotted out in support of their election campaigns. But once in the realm of politics they should be open to criticism. So if politician X involves her partner then that partner is fair game for political criticism and there should be no complaints about that politician's personal life being dragged into political fighting. It is going to be a dirty election and the politicians ought to think before dragging their partners into the muck.

All this user's posts have been removed.Why?

No ,we are not voting for their wife/husband. In fact we should be voting for the party in the UK as the PM is not an elected office but goes with the party leadership. You could vote for Cameron and find that he quits within 6 months and you have Hague as your prime minister.

Vote for the party which will do their best for the UK not for a personality.

No they should not get involved, they should earn the right to be there via being voted in.

This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the house rules. Explain.

Depends. If the spouse is good looking, it all helps to while away the hours spent not actually listening to what the candidate is saying. More seriously, I would hope any spouse would be willing to support in any way they can.

They aren't important at all. When a politician suddenly starts parading his pretty wife in front of the cameras as part of his election campaign you know he's getting desperate.

Here's a novel idea Dave, how about you tell us what your policies are and how they will be paid for?

Should politicians' partners get involved in political campaigns?

I suppose it's OK but on two conditions as far as I'm concerned:

1) They are not married to someone else.
2) They don't expect first class train tickets on tap at taxpayers' expense and are NOT allowed to claim ANY expenses.

Frankly I don't care who campaigns, wife, child or friend, no one will call on me, meetings will be at a minimum because the sitting MP knows he will be elected and that he can work for marginal seats elsewhere. I would just like to think my vote would count. Round here it does not due to our voting system.

Mr Cameron and his wife are good role models, so why shouldn't they work together on this and rightfully will win the elction on their morals and high standards.

I hope that if Mrs C is helping her husband that he will b at home looking after the children like other people have to do.

David Camerons wife is not one to seek attention and I believe that David Cameron would not ask his wife to help him just for votes, however I see nothing wrong with having a supportive wife who obviously loves her partner and believes in him.... a rare commodity it seems when you look at the U.K. Divorce rate...

Will it make me vote for him? No, I will only vote for someone who's policies I believe are right for me and the country overall.

It's pretty obvious that the influence of a partner will be enormous ... totally enormous... whether they go on the trail or not. I guess the average male MP will be running about in underpants looking for a sock whilst the wife rummages around in her purse for some dinner money with the hand thats not holding the electric iron.

They should be of no consequence to the voter, British politics is beginning to resemble US politics more and more. Whats next, do we appoint them 'First Lady'?
I think its quite sad politicians use members of their family for their own political ends.
Remember Mrs Brown introduction of Gordon at the Labour Party conference, "My hero, my husband.." So contrived....

This move shows that the Westminster Club has cottoned on to the fact that most of us British citizens don't want any of them, never mind that we are supposed to chose one of them.

I fully expect that if this "wheel out the little woman" ploy fails, we can expect to see more and more family members and their pets as the general public stay disinterested.
Will "Bobo" the tory hamster gain more interest than "Snuggles" the nu-labour rabbit?
Will there be a parade of tory pony-riders offset by an identically-timed display of nu-labour whippet fanciers?

The pun opportunities are endless.......

If Samantha Cameron wants to help David Cameron in his general election campaign - good luck to her and him! It would not change my voting intentions but it might be very revealing to hear just what she has to say?

"VERY" without a good wife a man is incomplete" in any walk of life not just politics.

This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the house rules. Explain.

Suppose instead we asked "How important are journalists' partners?"

There's nothing wrong with a politician's spouse wanting to do what he/she can to their partner achieve their goal. Most married couples do, regardless of their chosen career. But they need to remember that we didn't elect the partner. There's a difference between supporting and demanding a role that should go to someone qualified and/or elected.

Here we go, let's copy every silly thing the Americans do, this is the next step to turning our politics into show business, oscars to follow no doubt and cabinet ministers wives crying out "Oh My Gad" all day long.

Policies, not personal profiles please. If Mr Camerons wife wishes to assist his campaign then so be it, its only natural that she would want to. What people are looking for are good policies and decent politicians, and that is not the Conservative party I see before me.

I agree with comment 72, British politicians are emulating U.S. politics. Mrs Cameron is Britain's Mrs Obama, she will be interviewed time and again and it will produce a biased discourse about the capablity, resolve and decency of her husband and this will be printed en masse and peddled to the electorate. Mr Cameron will proceed, like Mr Obama did, with his slogan "year for change". Yes, change, but from what to what? From old to new? From worse to better? From same to same again?

I will end on this, the Conservative party will not be securing my vote.

This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the house rules. Explain.

Politicians partners are about as important as Jordans Chest size.

Artificially inflated.

There's nothing wrong with Mrs Cameron going around with her David at election times, nor with Jack Dromey accompanying his wife Harriet Harman if they want it that way. Nor with partners supporting their other half at official engagements or constituency knees-ups. But that's as far as it should go.(Remember Cherie?) We don't vote for the partners, so they should keep out of the work side of things - indeed, aren't MP's partners going to be prevented from being their constituency secretaries in the wake of the expenses debacle? And we certainly don't want to encourage the 'First Lady' idea.

Who says they have to have a partner in the first place?
You are electing the candidate and nobody else.

42. At 3:38pm on 12 Mar 2010, thomas wrote:
Seems to be just another case of following where America has lead. Why oh why do we shadow what they do - even when it is a patently bad idea?

I agree entirely, and this isn't the only post to make the same point. But it's not 'we' who are shadowing it, but the politicians themselves, and for some reason the news media - as if we care about the candy floss of American politics, or the minutiae of life in the US for that matter. My American friends over here don't seem to like it much, either.

Had Gordon Brown's wife not shoved herself into the limelight I dare say David Cameron's wife would have stayed in the shadows. Now we will have to put up with rubbish written about what they were wearing & how much it cost etc. For goodness sake cannot we get back to talking about what the parties will do if they get in power. The country is on its knees & we Will be sidetracked with a load of nonsense. Its bad enough having to put up with all female short lists.

Well why not, we have had glennis Kinnock, Cherie Blair, and Sarah Brown, all with their say. I wonder why the question is raised, now that the long dark night of the Nu-Lab. nightmare is coming to a end.

Frankly, I'd vote for the 'partners' rather than the husbands... David Cameron's wife seems especially well bred and able to do the right thing. Sarah Brown, of course, starts at a disadvantage since she married a man who never realised the fact that Gold holds its value!

86# Spot on there . It's all Sarah Brown's fault that Mrs Cameron felt compelled to pop herself into the limelight.
Actually , she is rather pretty and I do love her dress sense - gosh, who needs substance when there is all this style?
Come to think of it Dave's a pretty stylish sort of chap...that's a rather snazzy double breaster he's sporting..

79# Aww come on mods this is exactly the point i was trying to make at 81!

Cast Iron Cam's partner is important because she makes him look vaguely human- even though his humanity seems superficial and shallow as every other component of the production. She cannot compensate for how he appears in Parliament, as the school bully taunting the Prime Minister in the hope of casting another slur on his character. Elizabeth I was wedded to her country- Cameron is wedded to a wealthy heiress and a fantasy of Britain which is broken (easily broken because it was only ever a figment of complacent Tory imagination). He thinks in clichees and is wheeling on his wife as part of the cosmetic exercise to present himself as a simple family man- rather than the hard-nosed opportunist who will use anything to promote himself, and is careful to conceal his ultra Thatcherite agenda- a cover which was blown by Ed Vaisey last week. Has he, by chance, got a granny suffering an incurable disease he can do a set piece with? Perhaps he could adopt a wounded war-hero ( a fluffy bunny would be a mistake as his friends might be caught by paparazzi tearing it limb from limb with dogs). Wives and partners only matter where they know that they are not the appointee. Denis Thatcher's one quality was to keep in the background. Thus he is remembered as a jolly old buffer with a G & T in his hand rather than the ruthless businessman he really was- at least one Thatcher had a human face! Gordon Brown's wife has a mountain to climb. When the odious Kelvin MacKenzie is allowed to call her husband a liar by the ´óÏó´«Ã½ without rebuke it shows how far the media frenzy has gone. She has to help him show that he is real PM material as opposed to the schoolboy eleven on the opposition front bench!

The missus is part of the furniture, the 1st lady whether politically active or not, we just can't have a PM and not 'see er indoors' can we?

After all she's married to the PM.

I could not care less about who the candidate is married to, so long as he or she gets on with the job.

First the Tories critise Brown for appearing on TV and then they join them and do the same. Yet another bandwagon for Dave to jump on, the man's a follower not a leader

I remember growing up watching Denis Thatcher on TV. He did a great job shadowing Maggie wherever she went. Ever since Cherie Blair/Booth came along it forced the PM's wife to have as high a profile as their spouse.

No importance to me at all, I'm certainly not about to give any credence to heart felt appeals from said spouses with regard to the good character of their particular political partner.

If a political wife could simply support her husband quietly by her presence on the campaign trail etc. that would be fine. However, as soon as a wife appears in public, her clothes, hair, make-up,demeanour and personal qualities become a focus of interest to the tabloid press, fashion commentators and magazine editors. It's unfair on the person concerned and distracts from the main issues. How I long for the old days when the likes of Lady Churchill, Mrs Attlee, Lady Dorothy Macmillan and Mrs Callaghan appeared discreetly and banquets and state occasions - with no need to have a Personal Stylist, Holistic Therapist or Celebrity Hairdresser in tow......

This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the house rules. Explain.

Not important in the slightest. At least not to the electorate.

I couldn't care less about someone who will have no real power.

All it does is distract people from the issues and policies that they want to see debated whilst adding nothing new.

The media, including the ´óÏó´«Ã½, give these personality pieces too much hype and importance instead of giving us real news.

Yep! I take my wife with me to work on all my construction sites! She advises me on what to do and what to say to all the other guys! Then their wifes and mine all have afternoon tea together and discuss what to do next!
Let's ALL have First Ladies!
For god's sake just get on and do the job you were elected for and leave the other half at home because they were not in the running.