Well, today was eventful and have just finished watching myself on Newsnight and that 30 second clip sort of dominated the day.
It began with a Group Leaders meeting at City Hall, a sharp reminder that life goes on outside of the election and I still have an important job to do representing the people of Bowthorpe and Earlham and also the Conservatives in Norwich.
By 10.30 we were all at the Age UK / Age Concern Hustings held at the Vauxhall Centre. It was a great meeting and the Labour, LD, Green & UKIP candidates were there. Funnily enough the questions weren't all about older people's issues (which you might have expected). It kicked off with Britain's member of the EU but soon covered immigration, skills, the Lisbon Treaty & the funding of the voluntary sector. I was told by two of the audience that they felt I had "won" but I am not clear what that means in terms of these local debates where there is more agreement (yes, even between Tories and Greens) than you might imagine.
In the afternoon I did a quick interview for Heart Radio about the election campaign and then the whirlwind that is Michael Crick came to town. It was quick but fairly intensive. He just throws questions at you, plus the camera is always on. He made the critical error of thinking Mike Gillepsie - my agent, and somebody whom the party ought to employe PDQ after the election - was my brother and then went on to criticise the spelling of my name (no "h", you see) so that set us off well! He was stunned to note I was wearing a rosette - no idea why, I wear it pretty much all the time so people know who I am and can come up and chat if they want to. We then had a persistent Green heckler, although he soon got bored. Crick just raised an eyebrow. I think that said everything. Interestingly his questions focused on the campaign and the debate last night and yet the clip they used was my attack on Charles Clarke and his attempts to re-package himself as a Labour rebel rather than take responsibility for the last 13 years of government. Crick asked questions about my current career and if I had declared it on leaflets; the answer is yes and I am proud of being a teacher and proud of my school. Apparently some candidates don't tell people what they do for a living and don't put it on leaflets. Others - like Green Adrian Ramsay and LibDem Simon Wright - are "career politicans", which means they don't have jobs. Crick also asked where we recieved our funding from and seemed a little stunned to note we had raised the spending limit from small local donations. He then probed every bit of election material we put out - including our 2 latest leaflets for this week - and found nothing to raise. I am not moaning about this, I thought Mr Crick was very, very thorough in what he did and it was impressive to see what happens close up. The report itself was very fair and balanced, clearly stating the 4-way marginality of the seat and included clips of supporters of each parties. I think Newsnight did the job well, and Crick's scrutiny was detailed (I wonder if the other candidates got this??). The funny bit was the mess up with the name tags - they called Adrian "Simon", then corrected themselves but still spelt his name wrong!
After the fun and games we sorted ourselves out and started to deliver our letters to people who have Postal Votes, with several teams across the City. I joined our Eaton group to help and we ended up doorknocking as well. The feeling was good and we felt people moving over to the Conservatives. Two people mentioned Cameron's debate as their reason for switching to us, but yet more voters turned off by the negative LibDem campaign. I also met the owner of a significant local business who had decided to vote Conservative this time on the issue of wanting to pay down the debt quicker. I think the issues and debates are getting through.
Got home to find 2 different LibDem tabloid newspapers delivered - why together, unless they were struggling to get material out. Perhaps they don't have enough activists? Hmmm, I also wonder how close they are to the election spending limit?
Tonight Cameron faced Paxman and I thought he was calm and detailed in his answers. Cameron is looking more and more Prime Ministerial in the way in which he conducts himself -I thought it was impressive and certainly Paxman didn't get a knock out blow. People have picked up on the cuts for the North East and NI, but I would assume that all regions would share in the painful decisions to come - after all, "we're all in this together".
Tomorrow is a big day with plenty of letters to deliver and doors to knock on as Postal Votes hit the mats in Norwich South!
Showing posts with label michael crick. Show all posts
Showing posts with label michael crick. Show all posts
Friday, April 23, 2010
Tuesday, January 06, 2009
Let's start holding the hacks (and their bosses) to account
With the apparent revelation that Tory Chairman Caroline Spelman is to be cleared by the Parliamentary Watchdog for a misuse of public funds, there might be a case for looking at how such a claim came about - a kind of accountability equivalent of "wasting police time".
The story was broken by Michael Crick, a man for whom you may remember I have very little time or faith in (a low regard for which only one other figure in the media shares, in my opinion). On the night that Crick may have to eat humble pie, he then releases a massive non-story about CCHQ "watching" Tory candidates. The shock might of been that CCHQ wasn't watching candidates and I am sure both Labour and the LibDems do the same. The vehemently anti-Tory Crick is using one non-story to cover up the failure of another.
As I keep saying, politicans of all parties and at all levels are held accountable when they make false allegations or get things wrong. Why are hacks, policemen, school governors and the like not treated the same?
The story was broken by Michael Crick, a man for whom you may remember I have very little time or faith in (a low regard for which only one other figure in the media shares, in my opinion). On the night that Crick may have to eat humble pie, he then releases a massive non-story about CCHQ "watching" Tory candidates. The shock might of been that CCHQ wasn't watching candidates and I am sure both Labour and the LibDems do the same. The vehemently anti-Tory Crick is using one non-story to cover up the failure of another.
As I keep saying, politicans of all parties and at all levels are held accountable when they make false allegations or get things wrong. Why are hacks, policemen, school governors and the like not treated the same?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)