Nicola Sturgeon said: “Tonight’s debate shows why we need to break the old boys network at Westminster.”
Well, if the debate of the seven party leaders did not break the old boys network, it certainly dented it a little.
This was a new format for new politics. The SNP leader proved popular, with snap polls putting her way out on top. Straight after the poll, Yougov gave the First Minister 28%, a clear eight-point lead over Nigel Farage on 20%.
Cameron scored better than Miliband on 15% and Clegg on 10%. Natalie Bennett, the Green Party leader, scored 5%, just one point more than Plaid Cymru’s Leanne Wood.
A separate poll for ComRes/ITV gave the debate to Cameron, Miliband and Farage. The Guardian’s ICM poll gave it to Miliband. Sturgeon polled well in both of those which meant that she had the best average poll rating from all three. In a satisfaction poll for the Telegraph, the three women polled best.
And if the debate and the polls after indicate anything, it is that a coalition of some sort still seems the most likely election result.
By the end of the two hours, the SNP said that they gained an extra 1,200 members.
Although dented, it was the old boys network that tried to dominate. At times Cameron, Miliband and Clegg had their own debate. Farage took centre stage by shouting, and by being controversial. He argued that the NHS should refuse to treat people with HIV who had come to Britain from a different country.
The remark brought immediate condemnation from Plaid Cymru’s Leanne Wood who was speaking next. “You should be ashamed of yourself,” she said, to the first applause of the night.
“This kind of scaremongering rhetoric is dangerous. It divides communities and it creates stigma to people who are ill.”
Nicola Sturgeon, who followed next and drew much agreement from the rest of panel, said that the politicians should see the person, not the nationality.
Farage continued to attack British levels of international development and immigrants using the NHS.
Sturgeon said: “There’s nothing that Nigel Farage won’t blame on foreigners.”
The UKIP leader attacked Scotland for spending England’s money on free prescriptions and free education – but, as Sturgeon pointed out, Scotland more than pays its own way.
His remarks were roundly criticised by charities who deal with people suffering from HIV.
The debate format was busy. There were seven leaders, four questions and one moderator. After each of the four questions, each leader was given a short amount of time before they were able to address each other. It was messy and the host, Julie Etchingham, seemed to lose control more than once. Her handling of a difficult situation was, though, much praised later on.
As far as a strategy for the debaters, all apart from Sturgeon seemed to be playing to their core vote. The strategic approach seemed to be for Cameron, Miliband, and Clegg to avoid talking about Scotland and Wales. And it was clear that Ed Miliband’s core vote was not Scotland.
When the question of the EU referendum was brought up,
Sturgeon asked Cameron, Miliband and Clegg if they would guarantee that none of the individual nations that make up the UK will be forced out of Europe if they voted against leaving.
With the exception of Ed Miliband, who said that he did not want an in-out referendum, none of them answered the question.
Nick Clegg was asked about tuition fees. It was the question he had prepared for. He answered it by blaming Labour.
Sturgeon won a round of applause when she argued that the ability to learn was much more important than an ability to pay.
At one point Cameron was heckled. He valiantly attempted to answer, but the cameras cut away and he answered as the heckler was thrown out.
When the leaders had to sum up, Farage, the white, middle aged man who used to work in the city, and went to a school that charged annual fees of £17,500 and paints himself as the outsider, said: “I told you they were the same.”
But if the debate proved one thing, it is this – there is now, finally, an alternative.
Why are you making commenting on The National only available to subscribers?
We know there are thousands of National readers who want to debate, argue and go back and forth in the comments section of our stories. We’ve got the most informed readers in Scotland, asking each other the big questions about the future of our country.
Unfortunately, though, these important debates are being spoiled by a vocal minority of trolls who aren’t really interested in the issues, try to derail the conversations, register under fake names, and post vile abuse.
So that’s why we’ve decided to make the ability to comment only available to our paying subscribers. That way, all the trolls who post abuse on our website will have to pay if they want to join the debate – and risk a permanent ban from the account that they subscribe with.
The conversation will go back to what it should be about – people who care passionately about the issues, but disagree constructively on what we should do about them. Let’s get that debate started!
Callum Baird, Editor of The National
Comments: Our rules
We want our comments to be a lively and valuable part of our community - a place where readers can debate and engage with the most important local issues. The ability to comment on our stories is a privilege, not a right, however, and that privilege may be withdrawn if it is abused or misused.
Please report any comments that break our rules.
Read the rules here