We did see an example of political cross dressing in the big debate but it was temperament rather than trousers that were swapped. (BBC News, 03/05/2007)
3 May 2007
BBC Europe editor Mark Mardell on the delight of an election with a real clash of ideas, role reversal in the televised debate, and the odd couple of Segolene Royal and partner Francois Hollande.
The diary is published every Thursday. To always see the latest edition, please click here and bookmark this page.
The French election has been a delight to cover so far because there's a real debate about ideas, rather than the process in Britain which has seen 15 years of Labour stealing Conservative clothes and the Conservatives trying to steal them back again.
But we did see an example of political cross dressing in the big debate. I don't mean that Nicolas Sarkozy turned up in a white dress or that Madame Royal wore a tie - although she did wear a dark suit for the first time during this campaign rather than what a colleague calls her "nurse's outfit".
It was temperament rather than trousers that were swapped.
Segolene Royal's campaign has seemed a bit wet at times, with a recent rally ending with the statement that her project was "you" because "I love you".
Would-be supporters I spoke to before the debate wanted to know she had the steel to attack, the drive to be president. And here she was on the attack, aggressive, interrupting Mr Sarkozy, even (it seemed, at one stage) losing her temper.
Nicolas Sarkozy knew he had to do the opposite job and live down his reputation for brutal political aggression. He was calm, polite, even questioning with a pained expression why Madame Royal wouldn't listen to different ideas and treated people with disdain.
There were no knock-out blows but it will be interesting to see if the next opinion poll shows any movement.
When does the personal get political? In France, very rarely.
Although there are strict privacy laws, the fines for infringing them are not that big and they wouldn't deter a really determined newspaper or broadcaster. But the French media acquiesce, whether through agreement or fear it's hard to say.
I have some sympathy. The British press is intrusive enough to put anyone sane off going into public life.
Natural guilt about this prying makes it even worse because it leaves the media looking for an excuse. So instead of a gossipy "Bet you didn't know so-and-so was seeing such-and-such... fascinating, eh?" we get, "So-and-so was doing such-and-such... what an outrage! They must be sacked/apologise/publicly pilloried!"
 Francois Hollande's chance may come |
They hardly seem to be on speaking terms. The latest disagreement was over the Bayrou debate: he said it couldn't happen, she said it could. It reminds me a bit of the first election I covered close up: when the two Davids of the SDP, David Owen and David Steel, toured Britain by bus, often pumping out slightly different messages.
I was on the Owen bus and all the news lines came from phoning one's colleague on the other bus and comparing notes.
But what adds spice to the disagreements between Segolene Royal and Francois Hollande is that they have been together as a couple for over a quarter of a century. They have four children aged from early teens to early twenties.
I suppose there are several possibilities. It could be a cynical double act: he talks to the left, she to the centre and they both gamble that the French media won't savage them for their differences.
They could have established such unnaturally brutal Chinese walls that they don't talk strategic politics at home.
Or maybe they really don't talk much.
I thought the broken partnership of Gordon and Tony was unbeatable for rancour, but maybe it would be worse if they had brought up four kids together.
It must be difficult being Hollande. Although he and Royal have both had stratospheric careers, most of their friends always assumed he would be the one to reach they very top.
I must admit, when Segolene was selected I thought the Socialists had made the right choice from a strategic point of view. Avoiding one of the elephants, as the French call the heavyweight male socialists, looked like common sense.
She looked and sounded different and so symbolised a change. She may still win, but she doesn't sparkle. People vote for her with a clear head and calculation, not because they're wowed by her charisma.
Hollande on the other hand is supposed to be very amusing company. With a twinkle in his eye, he reminds me a little of the late John Smith, another cheerful, jovial man secure enough about his own intelligence not to have to show off.
For the saddest of reasons, Smith was never tested in high office. But for Hollande perhaps there will be another time.
Will Mr Sarkozy provoke "pillar collapse" in the European Union? Despite the ominous sounding phrase "pillar collapse" is backed by those who want a stronger and more active European Union. It simplifies the legal basis for the EU and arguably gives the European Commission more power.
I wrote a while back that Nicolas Sarkozy might be more ambitious in European policy than suits Mr B (a handy short form for whoever occupies Downing Street over the next couple of years).
Sarkozy was the first to come up with the idea of a "mini-treaty" to replace the constitution rejected in the French and Dutch referendums, and that is exactly what Downing Street thinks it can sell to the British public without a referendum.
But recently a senior British diplomat was slapped down by a Sarkozy aide for using the term. They now say the idea of a "revising treaty" is just a start. Mr Sarkozy is likely to be an enthusiast for the idea of an EU foreign minister, and getting rid of the veto in about 50 areas, just as the constitution promised.
Tony Blair and Gordon Brown are, I'm told, working very closely on the issue and talk regularly. If there is a separate Brown position he's not telling even the civil servants who are most closely involved.
 New salesman: If the deal is unsellable, it will remain unsellable |
Most people think Blair will do a deal, take the hit, and leave Gordon in the clear. But I'm not convinced this would work. If the deal is unsellable, it would remain unsellable even by a new salesman.
But there must be a real chance that at the June summit Blair refuses to sign up to something that would bind his successor. It would be a neat, if cynical, way of kicking the ball just a little further into the long grass.
Please use the post form below to comment on any of the issues raised in the diary.
It was certainly a very interesting debate and it's interesting that I saw things so differently that Steve in Bristol. I thought Sarko looked far more sincere than Sego and that Madame Royal was very defensive and using her usual tactic of tugging at the heartstrings.
Jason, London
Watched 75% of the debate (stopped watching when they started battling on nuclear energy without any correct information...), and thought some of less important issues took too much out of the two hours and 40 mn. Sarkozy's strategy to mollify the public with a softer image really backfired since he looked for the first time a bit unsure. Regardless of the accuracy of both candidates, which most voters will ignore, Ségolène won this round... Should be very interesting on Sunday.
Jay, London
I watched the whole debate live with my wife (French) and felt that it was just what we need here in the UK. Sarko was comprehensively outgunned on a couple of occasions - when Sego tore into him with indignation about abolishing her reforms of the rights of handicapped kids to go to school and then at the end - when she spoke clearly and elegantly into camera and sounded Presidential. He sounded like a kid at a job interview, looked shifty and did not look at the camera
steve virgin, Bristol
Your comments are interesting about the seeming non interest of the medai in all things personnal in politicians. I've been living and working in France for nearly 18 years now and I too had the same fascination for the subject, the same incredulous regard when Mitterand, still president, made it known that he had an illegitimate daughter through an affair while in office, or the Chirac's and their handicapped daughter...The French are not scandalised, they do not judge politicians by who they sleep (or don't sleep) with. Tis a shame that in Britain and America things are not the same.
,
So it's Madame Royal but Nicolas, never Monsieur Sarkozy?
John in Dulwich, London