Anyone catch this discussion on the BBC between William Hague and David Miliband this morning? It seemed to me that Hague was given significantly less air-time that Milipede who was allowed to keep interrupting him and was also granted the final say. Oh to be a Labour luvvie..
HAGUE VERSUS MR BEAN
Bookmark the permalink.
Well David, I timed the debate.
William Hague spoke for approximately 5 minutes and 41 seconds, that’s 341 seconds.
David Miliband spoke for spproximately 6 minutes and 22 seconds, that’s 382 seconds.
That’s a difference of about 41 seconds, or 12% more time. Whether you consider this significant or not is up to you.
As for interruptions, Miliband interrupted Hague more often than the other way round. The presenter interrupted them both about equally, though usually to stop Miliband going on when Hague was supposed to be speaking.
From being a means to promote trade (good), the EU seeks federalism throughout Europe. Enough!
Hague should content himself with the thought that Mr Bean will be Mr Has-Been, soon enough.
Listening to both of them convinced me that neither party has anything to offer on the EU. Hague and the Conservatives are deluding themselves (and trying to delude us) about the possibility of EU internal reform and Miliband? Well, he’s also just deluding himself (and trying to delude us) on the desperate need for the UK to be in the EU – the “top table” non-argument all over again. Since Hague was a bit more EU sceptical than Miliband, Davis kept harrassing Hague with Miliband’s debating points (eg concerning Conservatives dumping their “natural allies” on the continental right – which BTW ain’t the same as the UK right). At least the LibDems are honest (LibDem/honest is normally a contradiction in terms but in this case it’s more or less true) in that anything the EU wants is OK with them.
Listening to the three major parties on Europe is an exercise in spying differences in nuance not in policy: so much for “choice” in our democracy.
Despite the timings, for which thanks Statsman, if one is interrupted it is much more difficult to get your bullet points across effectively as the interrupter tends to dictate the direction of the conversation, sometimes off at a complete tangent to the point you are trying to make.
The presenter should therefore allow the person more time to get back to what they were saying – which would make the seconds imbalance more like 20%.
But what was really bad was how Milliboy was allowed to interrupt more than once. After the first time he shoud have been slapped down really hard.
Miliband’s pathetically craven apology for the Crusades brought to mind Leon Degrelle’s reputed reply when asked if he had any regrets about WW2: ‘Only that we lost.’
Well lets see if the EU really works shall we. Who wants a bet that it will be BRITISH workers at Vauxhall that pay the price for the General Motors bail out?
Martin,
Seeing as how Magna is going to cut the equivalent at Opel of half of Vauxhall’s entire workforce, and they’re going to use Opel workers to make other brands, you’re probably right. The BBC probably forgot to mention that part. But never mind. Think instead about British dole for British workers, paid for by your taxes and Gordon Brown’s “Flexible New Deal”, at least in Luton.
And anyways, it all started in America……
To be honest, I didn’t think there was too much wrong with the discussion, bias-wise, except perhaps letting David Miliband start and finish the discussion. I would suggest there are bigger fish to fry than this one.
I was also surprised at the short segment just after taking the p*ss out of Hugo Chavez.
Did anyone else catch comrade Millibrains comment about the ‘Tories using the EU as a boogyman just like they used the USSR’? I cant remember the exact words that millibrain used but Hague really missed a prime comeback that showed Millibrain for the lifelong marxist sympathiser spending his youth with soviet front groups and sucking marxist hogwash from his parents like mothers milk.
Hague could have pointed out that the Tories fought against the cruel,evil and bankrupt soviet socialist ideology where the Millibrain clan and labour would have supported a soviet takeover of the UK, if you remember it was a major reason why the labour friutcakes lost to thatcher during the cold war, remember also that the labour manifesto at the time was in fact nothing more than a soviet collaboration document detailing the UKs surrender terms to the USSR.
I suspect the Millibrain brothers longed for a marxist ideology to be imposed on the west, I sense a bitterness in them quite well hidden that it was in fact the Tory leadership and co opperation with Reagan that destroyed the evil USSR.
Both exude the kind of arrogant elitist demenour much like their political beliefs ie a thin fake veneer of caring on the surface barely covering a deep hatred and nastyness combined with an overwhelming sense of entitlement seeething within.
I see the Millibrains at home in the USSR loving the lifestyle of the commissar class.
I would just love Putin to release all the details about those British socialists who betrayed their nation and worked for the USSR, Ill bet the Millibrain clan was high on the list.
Statman,
Thanks for that!
Umbongo,
I agree.
Martin 4:04
Surely the British jobs will be safe with the noble Lord Mandelson fighting their corner, especially with his vast personal experience of business, commerce and finance ?
there is no difference in the times.
evan davis did a decent job