Browse > Home / Liberal Democrats / Oldham – thoughts for Lib Dems

| Subcribe via RSS

Oldham – thoughts for Lib Dems

January 15th, 2011 Posted in Liberal Democrats by

One serious omission from my previous post on Oldham. Norman Lamb (in the studio) and Tim Farron (at the Count) both gave stellar performances for the Lib Dems on the night (on the BBC’s by election programme).

Norman has long been a trusted friend of Lib Dem leaders and has a style and personality that makes him easily likeable. That possibly makes it all to easy to forget just how effective he really is in combative situations. I am sure he has many and important tasks within the Coalition – but why he is not given a more prominent role facing the public? He is easily one of the most effective advocates the Coalition has. Get this man out there. More. Now.

Tim Farron is likewise a class act. We have praised him on several occassions on this blog – his quality shines out- and whilst our support ultimately went to Susan during the election of President, I for one think that few, if any, could have done  a better job than Tim on the night. If he continues in this vein, and uses his many skills to support Nick and the party in coalition, then he will have my support all day long. Great job.

2 Responses to “Oldham – thoughts for Lib Dems”

  1. Jack Says:

    Tim Farron is always a fantastic communicator, sure, but Norman Lamb, I felt, absolutely embarrassed himself on BBC. He repeated himself relentlessly, he sounded hopelessly over-trained and studied, and lost his way several times, in a “Jeremy Browne on Question Time” kind of way. Losing an argument to Sadiq Khan, of all people, is not acceptable. I found myself shouting at the television continuously. Labour should not be allowed to take an inch, “even” 8 whole months after the economy was taken out of their butter-fingers, but Khan was allowed to take a mile and parrot their (false) line unhindered. There was one point when Michael Fallon (who was actually very calm and impressive) started speaking over Norman Lamb’s stuttering and Khan said “yes, please Michael, help him”. Not a good look!

  2. Angela Harbutt Says:

    I read your comments and so I re-watched the coverage (I had recorded.

    I am pleased to say that you are wrong on almost every count. So much so Jack that I have to ask … Whats your agenda?

    Norman corrected Sadiq (at least twice that I counted) – perhaps too politely for you to notice – but I like that style – and on my rewatching it was Norman who had Sadiq doing the stuttering… pressing Sadiq on his view of the Labour action on several occasions… which Sadiq could not/would not answer…

    And there is only so much pressing you can do when the coalition has the wrong strategy and its going to be a clear Labour win….but Norman won – not a knock out – but clearly on points..

    FFor info (having re-watched it) .. Norman also corrected Jon Sopel (with total charm/grace) – re previous electon results – Now that is a mark of a real PRO.

    He also hit totally the right tone with Fallon (and btw FAllon with Lamb)…

    So I cant find any evidence (having rewatched the whole programme and with no axe to grind ) to support your assertions…

    The fact that the BBC coverage was ludicrously biased and gave both studio time and OB time disproportionately to the Labour party (including that awful moment of BBC correspondent talking to local BBC correspondent about how “lovely” the Labour candidate is).. and the fact that Sopel lets Khan get away with sheer lies ….is hardly Norman Lambs ( or Michael Fallon’s ) fault. Thats the BBC folks….


    I read your comments Jack – I re-watched the programme – and am pleased to say – objectively – you are just wrong..

    Norman was possibly better than I stated in the blog on second viewing.

    So I must assume that you are a poor judge of TV presentational skills or have an agenda….
    I can’t help with the latter – but if you are just lacking experience on what works on TV I could at some point give you a few pointers. I worked in Tv for 20 yrs and in particular was paid to provide views on presenters /correspondents/personalities skills in news/curr affrs/live tv for several stations/organisations. I think that gives me some credibility in this field. What are your credentials out of interest.

    Best ANGELA