Another day, another TV debate – only this time it was Alan Johnson, Chris
Grayling and Chris Huhne behind the lecterns, talking crime on the Daily Politics. Just like yesterday’s debate, the questions were incisive and insistent. But the politicians conspired
to turn proceedings into a mush. There was very little clarity, a sizeable dollop of bickering, and proof, were it needed, that Huhne really can go on a bit.
To my mind, it all boiled down to likely audience perceptions. Chris Grayling was cornered on a number of issues (including a question addressing his “homophobic comments”), but he probably gauged those perceptions right when he emphasised the “sense” that crime is rising, and dwelt on a number of civil liberty issues – from the DNA database to ID cards. He rammed the point home by delivering his closing pitch to camera, referring directly to “what you want” – which, as Osborne and Clegg have shown, is one of the handiest items in the politicians’ TV debate toolkit.
Comments
Join the debate for just $5 for 3 months
Be part of the conversation with other Spectator readers by getting your first three months for $5.
UNLOCK ACCESS Just $5 for 3 monthsAlready a subscriber? Log in