"I am disappointed that when they don't answer questions the interviewer doesn't cut them off and reput the question. Any question is just treated as noise while the pollie takes breath before repeating their carefully scripted poems."
Yes, sadly, that is true.
Just on another front, the so-called leaders Debate is a farce. We had 3 journalists on the panel who asked the questions, and as expected, those questions were the questions that had been aired over and over already and we heard the same answers given. Why journalists only ? Why not an expert on economics, and an expert on social justice issues, etc etc to be on the panel to ask questions within their areas of expertise, putting more pressures on the leaders to give more meaningful answers.
It seems to be the practice now for the political parties to have their official election launch (that is when they put forward their main pitch to the electors) just days before the actual polling day. This is bad. We should legislate that political parties contesting an election should have their official launch (i.e. pitch for votes), say, 2 weeks after an election is called. This will allow a more organised critical review of their policies, instead of the present practice of releasing policies on an almost piece meal basis and by the time their launch their official election platform most of the policies have already been announced, in that process demeaning their official election launch.
In years gone by, I remember we learned of most of the contesting parties' policies on the day when they launched their official election platform.
Also, the Leaders Debate should be held AFTER they have announced most of their major policies, not before.
