主播大秀

主播大秀.co.uk

Talk about Newsnight

Latest programme

Friday, 22 June, 2007

  • Newsnight
  • 22 Jun 07, 05:01 PM

From Kavita Puri - programme producer.

gordon203nnpmqs.jpgWe have a a special edition of Newsnight tonight. The soon-to-be-Prime Minister Gordon Brown meets some of the 主播大秀's best brains - Martha Kearney, Political Editor Nick Robinson, Economics Editor Evan Davis and World Affairs Editor John Simpson. He's forensically interrogated on the economy, Iraq, Scotland, public services, Europe and trust. You may think I would say this, but it really is a compelling watch. See a preview .

Don't miss it. Do join us at 22:30.

And for our Editor's take on the programme see his blog here.

Comments  Post your comment

So Gordon has realised there is ability behind rosettes of another hue. Next he might become aware of a vast mass of talent that is allergic to rosettes? Then it is but a small step to waking up to the stupidity of PARTY politics. Will he then outlaw factional politics, and pre-selection of MPs? Will he call an election where constituents choose their own representative locally? Will this group of true representatives converge on Westminster to form 鈥 taraaaaaaaa! 鈥 a government of all the talents? What! And spoil the nihilistic fun of a bunch of bizarrely motivated weirdos? No 鈥 business as usual.

  • 2.
  • At 09:01 PM on 22 Jun 2007,
  • John Hilley wrote:

Brown to be "forensically interrogated" on Iraq? I wonder if the "best brains" can muster some more obvious questions, such as:

1. Having, as Chancellor, now released in excess of 拢5.3 billion, through the Special Reserve, for Iraq, has it ever occurred to you that you have helped pay for a murderous and costly war?

2. Given widespread opinion on the illegality of the war, from notable people like Hans Blix, aren't you, alongside Tony Blair, directly complicit in that supreme international crime?

3. By what moral standard should someone who refused to speak out about the Iraq catastrophe and loss of over 650,000 human beings be deemed fit to hold senior public office?

Sometimes I find it frightening to think of how these "best brains" can be so consistently oblivious to the gross crimes against humanity being committed by Blair, Brown and their cohorts. That those media "brains" are churning out such fawning swansong/coronation reportage while so many lie dead, and 4 million Iraqi refugees languish in misery, is nothing short of a moral crime in itself.

John

  • 3.
  • At 10:53 PM on 22 Jun 2007,
  • merle esson wrote:

I just switched off Newsnight. Same old lies from a politician who cannot give a decent or honest answer. Same old... same old. I hoped for so much more from Gordon Brown. I will not vote for him. Thirty years of labour support means nothing now. Go hang.

  • 4.
  • At 10:54 PM on 22 Jun 2007,
  • bram humphries wrote:

1. When is somone going to ask Brown if he is going to pay back the billions he has stolen from pension funds.
2. Will someone ask him why he is throwing away thousand of billions of pounds on PFI deals.
3. When is he going to take away the legislation which means further education for the rich, not the poor.

  • 5.
  • At 11:07 PM on 22 Jun 2007,
  • bram humphries wrote:

If all you wished to do with your in-dpth interview was to give Gordon Brown a chance to say what a nice man he was and how good for the country he would be, then you have done a great job. In any other respect your great 'brains' were an abject failure. I expect a far higher standard of questioning than this. It was like, as someone once said, 'being savaged by a poodle', or , in this case. three poodles.

  • 6.
  • At 11:13 PM on 22 Jun 2007,
  • Terry Aston wrote:

Why wasn't the Lothian question addressed when challenging about university fees in Scotland? Mr Brown was correct, the decision regarding fees has been devolved and the Scottish people vote for the party that offers the best choice.
How on earth do the English make that choice? If we vote for a party who offer free education they can be outvoted by Scottish MPs on purely party political grounds. Would the Scotts be happy for English MPs to vote against their choice? I think not. The fact that European students don't pay in Scotland but English students do, seems totally vindictive.
Avoiding this issue will lead to a bigger split in the Union. The BNP will gain votes and they will allow total devolution for Scotland but without the necessary cash.

Brown has indeed learned 鈥 but from Blair - and all the wrong stuff.
The 鈥淚鈥檓 comfortable with that鈥 smile (though the laugh still sometimes like Dr Hibbert of the Simpsons 鈥 鈥渋nappropriate鈥); the 鈥渙nce removed鈥 engagement with the question and a facile facility in answering some question other than that asked. If I go on, I shall descend into rant. It was bad enough when Thatcher became Major now Blair is morphing into Brown. There is only one hope: bring back "Spitting Image" 鈥 I need catharsis.

  • 8.
  • At 11:27 PM on 22 Jun 2007,
  • de castro wrote:

one bone of contention I have with the successtor to the "lap dog"s job.
Get our troops out of IRAQ before election if you wish to remain as prime minister.
TONY"s legacy ....your reversal of that decision...is just.
War in defence .. acceptable
War for OIL/MONEY .. totally unacceptable.
Come on GORDON (british scot) do the right thing....whatever happens after troop withdrawal your glory/legacy.

peace and love
compton of CHERIN

  • 9.
  • At 11:33 PM on 22 Jun 2007,
  • Ruby wrote:

A very good programme. Gordon Brown was slighly evasive over Iraq but he did say that he is putting measures in place to make sure intelligence information can't be manipulated again for political purposes. We must all hope that his measures do work.

The idea of having Gordon Brown as PM is very appealing - it's so pleasant to have a change from Tony Blair. Brown seems a more interesting and more thoughtful character.

I don't think he was asked about a potential postal strike. That could be bad for him on his first few days in office.

Yes in an ideal world he would have resigned over Iraq. The war would still have gone ahead, but possibly his resignation might have been enough to prevent the British involvement.

  • 10.
  • At 11:48 PM on 22 Jun 2007,
  • Ian Williams wrote:

Politicians are like nappies. They both need changing regularly and for the same reason.

  • 11.
  • At 03:50 AM on 23 Jun 2007,
  • Dominique Marion wrote:

I couldn't agree more with comment number five; what happened to Newsnight's normal rigerous debating and analysis? why wasn't Paxman in attendance to question GB? I was really disappointed with this Newsnight interview. As far as Brown is concerned, he reminds me of the snake on Kipling's Jungle Book - there's something I simply do not trust about this man. And he states that the PM job hasn't always been of interest to him - rubbish. The 主播大秀 has really missed (perhpas on purpose) a good opportunity to question GB. Blue Peter's presenters could have done better.

  • 12.
  • At 08:29 AM on 23 Jun 2007,
  • Brian Kelly wrote:

Quized by a quartet of leading political journalists with serious questions! Gordon Brown made the right movements with his mouth but the substance was ducked each & every time. For example.. the Q... how money for the Labour party had been given over "Cash for Honours" et al debacle... he slipped this one by stating, paraphased as,"Not me Gov" & nothing has been found that's illegal YET!.
So how come Mr Brown your party treasurer Jack Dromey went on National Television to say he knew nothing about the millions given to the Party! So allegedly there were 2 accounts ..GB knew zilch about what monies funded the 2005 election?..
pure fiction!And can we really believe he knew nothing about the Iraq dodgy dossier... only taking the blame for flawed intelligence...unbelievable!

This man is full of spin,fibs bliars style & sound bites.. not looking forward to this mans PMship!

  • 13.
  • At 09:44 AM on 23 Jun 2007,
  • John Howson wrote:

I was very dissapointed with the interview. As usual he was let off the hook. I look back to how the 主播大秀 interviewed Tories when they were in power and the difference is staggering. It was like him being interviewd by supporters as the probably are. He was not pressed on anything and they allowed him to ride over them. When Brown had said all he wanted to about something he looked away from the questioner as much as to say 'thats all' and they let him get away with it.

  • 14.
  • At 09:50 AM on 23 Jun 2007,
  • Brian J. wrote:

Well I thought it best to wait until the morning before I made a comment here.

I really can't believe how this man - et al - get away with what they are doing.

For instance, recently a local man in my area was sent to jail for growing a few Cannabis plants. Tony Blair - et al - lead the British people into a war that has so far killed <> 650,000 civilians and they get away with an apology..."sorry we wouldn't let that happen again".

Has everybody in the UK gone CRAZY!! I mean stark, staring, MAD? Get these criminals behind bars where they belong!

I will finish with a quote that I think is relevant:

"Naturally the common people don't want war; neither in Russia, nor in
England, nor in America, nor in Germany. That is understood. But after
all, it is the leaders of the country who determine policy, and it is
always a simple matter to drag the people along, whether it is a
democracy, or a Fascist dictatorship, or a parliament, or a communist
dictatorship. Voice or no voice, the people can always be brought to the
bidding of the leaders. That is easy. All you have to do is to tell them
they are being attacked, and denounce the pacifists for lack of
patriotism and exposing the country to danger. It works the same in any
country."

Hermann Goering

  • 15.
  • At 10:54 AM on 23 Jun 2007,
  • wrote:

I was impressed by Brown. What you see is what you get. If you want "Politics Lite", where style is more important than substance and where sound bites matter more than depth of meaning, then you won't go for Gordon. Flashy he ain't. He is a bit of a policy wonk, seriously serious, patently honourable and fearless. The Newsnight team questioned him well - there was no cosy stuff. Brown handled the questions with sincerity and I pretty much bought into all his answers. Incidentally Brown is very unusual as a politician and I can't really think of anyone that he reminds me of. The moral dimension in his character is strong but he doesn't parade it too forcibly (maybe he should a bit more). I prefer the Low Church manner to Blair's Anglo-Catholicism!


  • 16.
  • At 11:12 AM on 23 Jun 2007,
  • George C.A. Talbot wrote:

An interesting interview!

But how could you hear Gordon Brown say a single European currency could be good without asking him how he would control inflation were he to adopt the euro?

Inflation could be controlled without changing the Bank Rate as occurred when we had a Prices and Incomes policy. But I gather this is taboo nowadays!

23rd June 2007

  • 17.
  • At 11:38 AM on 23 Jun 2007,
  • Alec McCormack wrote:

Hey Gordon,

If you're so good at economics why did you sell all the gold. And did I hear a quip about a single world currency in that interview? You scare me with your New World Order speeches. You're not getting my vote

  • 18.
  • At 02:08 PM on 23 Jun 2007,
  • Maurice - Northumberland wrote:

The 主播大秀 had a Golden opportunity to ask the Question:-
What is the total PFI/PPI debt both Nationally and Locally, what is the annual payments, how long for?
But didn't take the opportunity, or was this an out of bounds subject?

  • 19.
  • At 03:11 PM on 23 Jun 2007,
  • eee aarrrgh donkey wrote:

Did every one at newsnight bow when gordon entered the studio or what!
This was billed as a big show but turned into a 主播大秀 love-in, my fingers were down my throat.

  • 20.
  • At 03:58 PM on 23 Jun 2007,
  • Brian Kelly wrote:

Peter Barron....reading the foregoing posts I believe the concensus is obvious...IT DIDN'T FOOL MANY VIEWERS!
GB was given an easy ride dressed -up to appear( Frost like)a serious probing debate.

  • 21.
  • At 09:34 PM on 23 Jun 2007,
  • L Benckendorff wrote:

I was completely revolted by this panel of questions to Gordon Brown. Inaccurate/misleading answers by Brown were never followed up. Each panellist had his own list of questions and never seemed to listen or care about the answers to other's questions. It was a complete love-fest and nothing else. Asked about Iraq, Brown said that it was provoked by S Hussein's failure to comply with United Nation's resolutions: no mention by the questioners that Hussein did agree to comply at the very last minute and that the invasion was launched WITHOUT the mandate of the United Nations (and no mention that the one country, far more than Iraq which has brazenly flaunted more UN resolutions than any other country, Israel, has never been threatened with invasion etc) and against the advice of the UN weapons inspectors. Brown said that the invasion was the right decision -- no response from the panellists, asking how the 650,000 deaths and total infrastucture destruction, let alone the lack of justification for the invasion (the bogus 鈥淚ntelligence鈥 regarding WMD etc) can be called a good decision. In fact there is no reason why any independent country in the Middle East should not have its own nuclear deterrent, given that there is one aggressive, rogue nation there which has consistently attacked its neighbors and which possesses atomic weapons. No follow-up on the question concerning Scotland鈥檚 ability to offer free university tuition to Scots --- because the UK parliament awards Scotland 拢1700 per capita more than is set aside for an English citizen. Why would the English want their taxes allocated to killing and destroying another country rather than better education for themselves? The panellists concentrated their tax questions on just one: they wanted to be reassured that the top band of income tax would not be increased. Viewers would have preferred some hard questions concerning the MANY stealth taxes which have hurt the working class and middle class far more, some reassurance that the main family home (purchased with money that has already been taxed as well as VAT on top of that to any maintenance and improvements) can be passed to their children.

  • 22.
  • At 09:35 PM on 23 Jun 2007,
  • L Benckendorff wrote:

I was completely revolted by this panel of questions to Gordon Brown. Inaccurate/misleading answers by Brown were never followed up. Each panellist had his own list of questions and never seemed to listen or care about the answers to other's questions. It was a complete love-fest and nothing else. Asked about Iraq, Brown said that it was provoked by S Hussein's failure to comply with United Nation's resolutions: no mention by the questioners that Hussein did agree to comply at the very last minute and that the invasion was launched WITHOUT the mandate of the United Nations (and no mention that the one country, far more than Iraq which has brazenly flaunted more UN resolutions than any other country, Israel, has never been threatened with invasion etc) and against the advice of the UN weapons inspectors. Brown said that the invasion was the right decision -- no response from the panellists, asking how the 650,000 deaths and total infrastucture destruction, let alone the lack of justification for the invasion (the bogus 鈥淚ntelligence鈥 regarding WMD etc) can be called a good decision. In fact there is no reason why any independent country in the Middle East should not have its own nuclear deterrent, given that there is one aggressive, rogue nation there which has consistently attacked its neighbors and which possesses atomic weapons. No follow-up on the question concerning Scotland鈥檚 ability to offer free university tuition to Scots --- because the UK parliament awards Scotland 拢1700 per capita more than is set aside for an English citizen. Why would the English want their taxes allocated to killing and destroying another country rather than better education for themselves? The panellists concentrated their tax questions on just one: they wanted to be reassured that the top band of income tax would not be increased. Viewers would have preferred some hard questions concerning the MANY stealth taxes which have hurt the working class and middle class far more, some reassurance that the main family home (purchased with money that has already been taxed as well as VAT on top of that to any maintenance and improvements) can be passed to their children.

  • 23.
  • At 10:09 PM on 23 Jun 2007,
  • wrote:

So our prudent Chancellor (who bestowed that mantle anyway? There seems little to support it) and inherited-by-default new leader has learned, will reach out, build consensus and answer questions at last.

But if the answers to such questions are, and allowed to be (especially in the case of what is surely easily established fact) 'I don't accept that', I'm afraid to all of the above I can only have one reply:

"I don't accept that".

But, as always in this newsflip era, that's probably all there is time for. Shame. On all involved, and complicit.

And it doesn't look like I am the only one to feel this way.

A sad moment in politics. And for journalism. And for the country.

  • 24.
  • At 11:25 PM on 23 Jun 2007,
  • Frank Hudson wrote:

What a charade!

As for 'forensically interrogated' and 'a compelling watch' ...... words simply fail me. The promise of an inquisitorial approach by the holders of the 主播大秀's 'sharpest minds' was, in the word of one D. Cameron - delusional.

Then again, perhaps they did better during rehearsals, but the dodgy bits were edited out so as to prevent eyebrows being raised prior to the pre-ordained 'agreement reached' announcement at the EU Summit.

All the 'fierce' exchanges reported to have taken place between Blair and Brown in the recent past were as contrived as this Brown interview and the results from Brussels, as predicted, serve to show that the Blair/Brown 'red lines' were as ever, red herrings.
Brown will now feel that he can confidently proclaim that a referendum on Europe is not necessary: this, despite the fact that Blair has yet again agreed to concede - against the Country's wishes - a transferrence of power in no fewer than forty plus other National matters.

  • 25.
  • At 12:18 AM on 24 Jun 2007,
  • L Benckendorff wrote:

I was completely revolted by this panel of questions to Gordon Brown. Inaccurate/misleading answers by Brown were never followed up. Each panellist had his own list of questions and never seemed to listen or care about the answers to other's questions. It was a complete love-fest and nothing else. Asked about Iraq, Brown said that it was provoked by S Hussein's failure to comply with United Nation's resolutions: no mention by the questioners that Hussein did agree to comply at the very last minute and that the invasion was launched WITHOUT the mandate of the United Nations (and no mention that the one country, far more than Iraq which has brazenly flaunted more UN resolutions than any other country, Israel, has never been threatened with invasion etc) and against the advice of the UN weapons inspectors. Brown said that the invasion was the right decision -- no response from the panellists, asking how the 650,000 deaths and total infrastucture destruction, let alone the lack of justification for the invasion (the bogus 鈥淚ntelligence鈥 regarding WMD etc) can be called a good decision. In fact there is no reason why any independent country in the Middle East should not have its own nuclear deterrent, given that there is one aggressive, rogue nation there which has consistently attacked its neighbors and which possesses atomic weapons. No follow-up on the question concerning Scotland鈥檚 ability to offer free university tuition to Scots --- because the UK parliament awards Scotland 拢1700 per capita more than is set aside for an English citizen. Why would the English want their taxes allocated to killing and destroying another country rather than better education for themselves? The panellists concentrated their tax questions on just one: they wanted to be reassured that the top band of income tax would not be increased. Viewers would have preferred some hard questions concerning the MANY stealth taxes which have hurt the working class and middle class far more, some reassurance that the main family home (purchased with money that has already been taxed as well as VAT on top of that to any maintenance and improvements) can be passed to their children.

  • 26.
  • At 09:08 PM on 24 Jun 2007,
  • wrote:

Dear cyberspace, please give me a hug. Since watching Brown interviewed by Sopel, I realise Gordon is just Tony writ badly. To assert that his close chum (suddenly 鈥淭ony鈥) was a 鈥淪killed negotiator鈥 as he held to four non-negotiable 鈥渞ed lines鈥 says little for his powers of deception and nothing for his power of reason. I know no one will read this, even in Gordon鈥檚 new 鈥渓istening age鈥 (is there an echo in here?) but look at the future! Shiny boy Cameron? Ming the meaningless? Labour-because-they-bought-a-feckless-enfranchised-fraction-of-the-electorate 鈥 under another charlatan, who buys into this pious deceit? Weep Britian.

  • 27.
  • At 10:05 AM on 25 Jun 2007,
  • Marko Nguet wrote:

Anyone praising GB should take a wait-and-see time to do so.

Since he is a politician, it is too early for me to owe him my praises.

I have enough of their rhetorics. At the moment I can prefer TB to GB whose actions are yet to be realized.

It is God alone who knows what is coming with GB.

  • 28.
  • At 06:08 PM on 28 Jul 2007,
  • N Campbell wrote:

The daft thing is that my postman says there was NO MENTION of the 2.5 percent on the ballot paper. IE The question was.........YES or NO TO A STRIKE

Does this mean the Union has "conned" us all?

This post is closed to new comments.

The 主播大秀 is not responsible for the content of external internet sites