Public want - and expect - TV debates to be held in run-up to next year's general election, says Lords

In the midst of speculation about the permutations of the imminent campaign, televised election debates are proving to be central to the build-up: Who will be on the podium? How many debates will there be? Who will benefit? The Committee's report begins with the concern that political jockeying over the answers to these questions risks a return to the historical pattern of failure to reach agreement and failure, as a result, to ensure the debates reach our screens. The Committee argue that this would be regrettable in light of powerful evidence that the public expects the debates to happen again and research showing the ways in which the debates served the public interest: helping to energise and engage the public in the electoral process, with the most striking impact on the young and relatively disengaged.

The Committee's Report also sets out the ways in which speculation over the question of participation in the debates is sometimes misinformed. A proper understanding of the legal and regulatory framework around broadcast content is important in answering some of the perennial—though not necessarily warranted—questions which have been raised about the propriety of broadcasters' judgements over who can participate. The Committee argues that a proper understanding of this framework also makes it clear why the case made for certain proposals, such as the introduction of an independent debates commission on the US model, is in fact insubstantial.

Finally, the Committee propose a number of evolutionary reforms to the production of the debates under the continuing editorial stewardship of the broadcasters. Should they take place again in 2015 and beyond, the broadcasters should collectively make more of the opportunity to inform voters and to encourage the public to be interested in the electoral process; they should adopt a clearer, better communicated set of processes and principles during their organisation; they should establish an online portal or hub for the debates to ensure their easy discoverability alongside other election resources; and they should make sure they consider the balance of gender and ethnic diversity among the moderators.

Chairman of the Committee, Lord Inglewood, said:

"We only have a year to go before the next general election and already there is much discussion underway, both in the media and between the broadcasters, about whether the debates will happen again in 2015, even given their success in 2010.

“What has been made very clear to us is that most people would be interested in the debates happening again, and we hope that this report will help to show that and in doing so make it harder for any reluctant party leaders and their strategists to withdraw from participating in something which the public expects to happen and which in a number of ways can be seen to have been in the public interest.

“However, there is a great deal of speculation around at the moment about who should be allowed to participate in the debates; sometimes pretty ill-informed about the answer to that question.  Under the current arrangements, a whole series of legal and regulatory safeguards and rules are in place to ensure that all political parties are given due weight and coverage by the broadcasters during an election period. And this doesn't just mean the debates, but the whole patchwork of coverage relating to the election, of which the debates are just a part.

“Suggestions have been made for the establishment of an independent body to oversee the organisation and arrangement of debates, but we see no need for that; the rules that already exist make this unnecessary, if not a rather insubstantial idea.

“But we do think that the broadcasters could collectively do more to inform voters and encourage the public to be interested in the issues and the process. We already know that 87% of 18-24 year olds – traditionally the demographic most likely to experience voter apathy – said that the debates led to them discussing the election and relevant issues with their peers. 

“This is exactly what we need to capitalise on and why, although we emphatically do not want to interfere in any way with the editorial independence of the broadcasters, we believe our report is timely in order to provide food for thought in considering how to build on the success that last times' debates undoubtedly achieved.”