I think interviewers should allow people to answer without interruption.
I can't stand either of those two.
The problem for interviewers in programmes like this is that it's their job to get an actual answer from the interviewee. When you're dealing with a politician who doesn't want to answer your questions, they will just waffle on about something else for as long as you allow them. You hear this all the time from politicians, who say things like, "I'm glad you raised the issue of (insert tenuous link to question here) because what I find interesting is (insert whatever another party has done which is bad here)".
We reached a stage where politicians became so practised at this technique that the only way for interviewers to get anything "real" from them was to attempt to badger them into dropping the façade.
I (almost) feel sorry for Mundell. In less unusual circumstances, ie. where the governing party wasn't more or less bound to appoint it's only sitting MP in the Quasi-Federal region of North Britain as secretary of state for the QFroNB, he wouldn' t be allowed to carry the bag of the guy that carries the bag of the SoS for the QFroNB.
Pretty much the same applies to Kezia Dugdale and I'm an MP. Although to be fair to the latter, he has managed to engineer a situation where he's *not* the shadow SoS for the QFroNB despite being the only sitting MP from the official opposition. 2nd in a 1 horse race, some going!
Although to be fair to the latter, he has managed to engineer a situation where he's *not* the shadow SoS for the QFroNB despite being the only sitting MP from the official opposition. 2nd in a 1 horse race, some going!
What a laughing stock the Labour Party has become.
Buy nothing online unless you click here first. I'm already £1,497.46 better off!