I'm in company given the number of universities, schools, local authorities and even Italians who use the word. You need to distinguish between the idea of a piece of paper (our corrupted version of the word) and the Latin concept. Agendae being the feminine plural of agenda in the nomative.

At the end of the day these guys are answerable to us the electorate. I would have thought - if you believe you have a strong case - you would want a platform to tell as many people as possible about your stand point?

What is Cameron scared - surely not Ed for goodness sake. The one sure thing that will give the Tories an edge is to get Ed up there for everyone to see.

He should not have a choice he is a public servant at the end of the day.

He's nothing to fear from Ed but Farage will tear him a new one no doubt. So he's probably scared of having a live debate with the real leader of the Tories.

Green Party has more members than UKIP & will probably have more than the Lib Dems by the time you read this.

He will only have to face Farage in one of the three debates - so he should be able to fend him off. let's face it they spend all their time doing this.

Cameron would p1ss all over Farage in a live debate, if UKIP ever get around to publishing a manifesto that looks anything like their commitments from their September conference then the only question required would be "How are you going to pay for that and who is the person who has costed all this out?" On UKIP's two main reasons for being in existence Cameron has promised a referendum on EU membership so a draw on that debate and on immigration he consistently blames Labour and has promised to cut it back, no case to answer on that debate either both leaders are actually in agreement.

According to Chris Patten, rlCameron has everything to fear from debating with Milibandrl

One less politician talking bollix is always a result in my book.
I'd prefer a full row of empty lecterns.
It's the same old turd.
Heard it all before haven't we?

I tend to agree.

In my opinion they are not really debates at all if recent ones are anything to go by. These so called debates are good for TV programmers as they are very low cost but do little for democracy. You will hear nothing new and they will be decided upon by who has the best celebrity status on the night and not who has the best policies for the country

In the Scottish independence referendum so called debate, the loud mouth Salmond nearly bluffed his way to victory and managed to convince many that the Scottish economy would boom on the back of the oil revenue income. I have always considered there was something fishy about the SNP what with leaders called Salmond and Sturgeon. To think he nearly netted the Scottish public hook line and sinker with his oily tales of riches from the North Sea. Some poor soles still haven't smoked out that the SNP economic ship would have sunk given the reality of the spot market.

Then if you recall the debates of the 2010 election which convinced enough voters to bring to power that weasle Clegg. Remember how a well rehed Clegg won favour by looking directly into the camera and somehow being perceived as more honest.! If that alone doesn't put you off live televised debates nothing will!

We do not have a presidential system in the UK and it is quite likely that if the TV debates go ahead none of the participants will actually become the next PM anyway. Recent polls suggest Labour will lose at least half their Scottish seats and even if the Conservatives take the largest share of the vote they may well not have an overall majority so we face the uncomfortable senario of the SNP holding the balance of power and propping up a Labour government in exchange for blackmailed demands for more powers and money for Scotland. So it is quite possible that to form a coalition each of the main parties will have to ditch their current leaders.

I do not think that David Cameron is being "chicken" in fact he is being more of a "fox" ie cunning rather than cowadice. The 2010 debates cost him an overall majority because of people voting based on personality rather than policy. To go against skilled debaters like Farage a la Salmond in the Scottish versions he has everything to lose and very little to gain. With Ukip sniping at the Conservatives the Greens would bring some form of balance as they snipe at Labour and the Lib Dems.

Finally with the news that the 'Pub Landlord' (FUKP) is to stand against Nigel Farage we should at least have some fun to look forward to. With policies that include beer at a penny a pint, bricking up the channel tunnel, revaluing the pound so it is worth £1.10 he may even win some votes.

Now if the TV debates included Al Murray there would be a good reason to rethink my position.

Why did you log out of the Juan Cornetto account and sign back in as Lord Elpers?

Did anyone see Andrew Neil destroy Harman on Sunday Politics yesterday on all matters to do with the economy and the cost of living. Labour's insistence to try and keep that lovely 'Cost of Living Crisis' sound bite on the agenda is making them look ridiculous when the statistics just are not showing any such crisis.

Labour should really try and steer the agenda away from the economy at the general election if they want to win.

not to mention the Labour Energy Price "freeze" that would have the effect of keeping household prices high whilst the wholesale price falls.

Soundbites are all that is required to win votes and elections - if you can convince enough people that they are not feeling particularly wealthy despite the opposition crowing on all the time about a booming economy then you will take seats, statistics will prove anything and the truth comes no-where near a politicians lips at election time.

Quite frankly I can't see Labour's pathetic leadership 2 Eds, Cooper, Harman, etc convincing anybody. They are truly wet and hopeless.

Quite frankly I can't see Labour's pathetic leadership 2 Eds, Cooper, Harman, etc convincing anybody. They are truly wet and hopeless.