´óÏó´«Ã½

a leaders debate would have to include all leaders including green, bnp, monster raving looney etc?

Why didn't they just call it the "Liars' Debate"?

...then it would be appropriate from any perspective!

It should be called, "How to disenfranchise 10 million people of Northern Ireland, Scotland and Wales"

These National/UK/English debates have no relevance outside the Little Englander mentality of the ´óÏó´«Ã½, ITV and SKY.

Who cares!

This has been great for politics, even fate has taken a hand providing a bit of timely embarresment via an imaginary ash cloud. I wonder how many weary travellers will be voting labour?

Most likely end game at this point in time is a hung parliament with Liddems having more % tage of vote but labour more seats. Nick clegg should make it clear that in that situation he would be PM and Vc would be chancellor and Proportional representation for any coalition.

That would be the only fair result for the public and he should insist on it. I would hope labour would be concerned enough about the nation than their own power base to accept the publics wishes rather than cling onto the warped number of seats they will have disproportionate to the will of the people.

If they refused there would probably have to be another election, under such circumstance I imagine labour would be obliterated anyway by popular opinion.

Cameron can not win now.

Its going to be interesting.

"Gotcha"? How many more times does it have to be pointed out that it's simply not necessary to stand in - let alone win - a majority of parliamentary seats in order to become PM? These ace negotiators, whoever they are, ought to have consulted a constitutional expert or two before they convinced themselves they'd come up with such a "brilliant" wheeze. Yes, we all know that in practice neither the SNP or Plaid are going to supply the PM - but equally we know, even at this stage (thanks to the inequities of our electoral system) that exactly the same applies to the Lib Dems.

However, I agree that this charade has been exposed even more now that Sky and ITV aren't even bothering to persevere with it.

How about 'What's Our Agenda?' (who 'we' are being key).

Just watched SKY News, and now wondering why the travails of the Bristol transport system would have any bearing on what is meant to be a national debate.

Further, it seems to have turned into yet another narrow topic-specific, editorially pre-selected, rehearsable farce, tonight 'focussed' on foreign affairs. I thought I was submitting questions across a raft of national topics, not what one channel is going to 'specialise' in.

In light of revelations recently on certain broadcast entities' senior management and internal structures, with in one case a comments moderator also being an aspiring candidate, one can only imagine what might make it through, or be edited out before even getting asked on air.

You want to guarantee me that any of THOSE three are going to be PM? Suppose the Lib/Lab make a deal in a hung parliament that the Libs support the Labs IF Brown goes. So Miliband ends up PM.

Perfectly legal and where does that put the little "only someone who can be PM" argument? Aye. In the bin where it belongs.

Ah, but that was always because they didn't want people to hear Salmond argue against Tridents, ID cards, the House of Lords, etc.