Will it ever get as bad as this for Gordon?
January 23rd, 2008
Do PMQs really turn the voters off?
According to a report in the Independent yesterday Gordon Brown is telling friends that the public is being increasingly repelled by PMQs and that the Commons exchanges are now of little use in discussing the issues of the day. He’s reported as saying that “nothing prepares you” for the ferocity of a packed chamber in full cry” and that the weekly event is worse than it has ever been
I’m not so sure. The above short video shows a couple of exchanges between Tony Blair and John Major in the period before the 1997 election when, of course, Blair was asking the questions. The “Weak..Weak..Weak” refrain has become famous and shows Blair at his most aggressive. I do not think that Cameron has yet matched this in his exchanges with Gordon.
In those days, of course, the Prime Minister had to face the house twice a week on Tuesdays and Thursdays. One of the things that Blair in 1997 was to reduce this to once although the time allocated was doubled.
Before Gordon came in I thought that he would change the format to something that would more suit his style. He certainly could have done this during his first few weeks when everything was going for him. Now I think that introducing changes would be very difficult.
The main weapon a Prime Minister has is that he always has the last word during the clashes with the opposition leader. Tony Blair used this to great effect and would save his most stinging comments for the final answer knowing there could be no response. Now Brown is suggesting to aides that Tory MPs are trying to blunt the edge of his final reply by trying to howl him down.
Does it all matter? I think it does. The government of the day has such a control over the news agenda that often the only chance an opposition has to get attention is at PMQs. The Tory and Lib Dem leaders have to use the questions they are allocated to best effect.
It starts again at noon today and is carried live on Sky News, BBC News 24, Radio Five Live and BBC Parliament. Let’s see what happens.
Mike Smithson
MessageSpace Advertising
You may not have noticed, but BBC News has removed “Politics” as a sub-heading on its web site, thus making it a tad more difficult to watch PMQs or any of the debates about the European Constitution. Pure coincidence, I’m sure.
It doesn’t matter outside the House if Brown is shouted down because the microphones will still pick him up. He needs to remain calm and Prime Ministerial.
It does matter inside the village because many MPs know little about politics and even less about television so they get artificially depressed or elated and pass on their moods to the lobby hacks.
More interesting is the suggestion of dirty tricks from Cameron’s Conservatives. Surely not?
An American rigger wrote last week:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/01/17/AR2008011703582_pf.html
1 - are you sure? I thought i’d noticed that before, but it turned out to be a quirk of accessing from a Pda.
Yes I expect Brown would like to phase out PMQs. He already thinks PMQs means the Prime Minister asks the questions.
Let’s face it, generally Parliament is just a charade. There is little point in debating any policies if the government has already made up its mind and whipped its members into shape. It is a talking shop made up mainly of sycophants who only talk the talk and rarely persaude a vote to go the other way. So yes it is extremely boring to Joe Public.
The real problem is there is no decent opposition to hold New Labour to account so they continue to roll out whatever policies they like based on manipulated information, for example, 24 hour drinking, Cannibis declassification, Home Information packs, Postal voting, GM food, Iraq, WMD. Each time these flawed policies turn into a fiasco creating more problems. Expert opinion, trials, committees, reports, etc are whitewashed so we only get the conclusion the government wants.
Nuclear power is safe in UK, but Germany has inexplicable clusters of child leakemia near power stations. Why is that? Because this government is bent to its nuclear core and we are ruled by deception. If the opposition cannot bring the constant deception to the public attention and ensure it is not continued, then this is not a democracy.
It is time the Tories had a leader who knew how to put the boot in when it matters, then Brown might really feel the “ferocity of a packed chamber in full cry.” And what a shame Nick Clegg has already proven he is just like the rest of them, denying the British people a say on the EU constitution after they promised a referendum. It is clear to me they are nearly all in politics only to feed their own egos and not for the people. No wonder why the public are turned off.
3 - Thanks, Alex. My mistake - I’m using a new browser and had loaded the International rather than the UK version. AOK now.
From today’s Times:
Ed Balls, the Schools Secretary and Gordon Brown’s close ally, went close to suggesting that (interest rate) cuts were on the way. “The good news from Britain’s point of view is that inflation is low, and is coming down,” he told the BBC.
And from the Telegraph:
Inflation could rise significantly above target this year, Bank of England governor Mervyn King warned last night. Rising oil, gas and food prices will push up household bills to such an extent that inflation could rise above 3pc, the level at which the governor is forced to write to the Chancellor to explain.
The rate is currently 2.1pc, close to the target annual rate of 2pc for the Consumer Price Index. But Mr King said: “It is possible that inflation could rise to the level at which I would need to write an open letter of explanation, possibly more than one, to the Chancellor.”
PMQ - which of these two gentlemen is telling the truth?
Mike, is trawling through YouTube turning into a habit these days?!
PMQs does matter because MPs are ultimately humans beings (easy to forget, I know) who will be galvinsed or depressed by their leader’s performances. Indeed any stirring attack or defence can motivate them - witness the brief and, with hindsight, ludicrous - elation of the Tory benches in 1995 when Michael Howard knocked Jack Straw around on the subject of Derek Lewis. So comprehensively were Labour demolished that for a few days there was a buzz that the election “could be won” for us; whilst in the left-wing press there was much hand-wringing and speculation over whether Straw could possibly keep a front-bench position - and indeed over Blair’s judgement. Obivously this was not followed up but occasionally the leadership can gee-up its parliamentary followers and really utilise the excitement to do something. That is why it is important for the leadership to be articulate at the despatch box.
6. Balls also told porkies saying we had borrowed less than other nations so we were in good shape. Which nations ? Zimbabwe ?
QUESTION - Is Mr Brown aware that The Head Economist in California University is giving a seminar next week in Stanford titled ‘The Coming Collapse Of The Euro Area’?
His name is Professor Eichengreen. He was the IMF’s Chief Economist prior to becoming Professor of Economics and Political Science at Berkeley.
What discussions are going on between the Prime Minister and other European leaders about Britain and her currency?
Something I noticed. Gordon Brown stated in the last PMQs that on Northerm Rock he was taking the action needed for the stability of the economy.
If the stability of the economy hinges on the fate of one bank, then the economy must be in a very fragile state!
It’s pointless for Gordo to moan about PMQs - if he doesn’t like then he needn’t have taken the job.
It is Gordon’s bad luck that broadband technology is improving so fast. It’s now possible for millions of people to watch this spectacle for a while in their homes and offices, and even on the move, who would previously have been cut off from it.
But what is bad luck for him is good for democracy.
There’s a good chance that Brown will try and stop PMQ’s. For the first time in his life, he has people questioning his genius and his right to be the great leader. For a control freak like him, it is a massive challenge.
The guy’s a proven coward- he will try to run away from it, like everything else that’s dificult
5 - no, thank you, mirthios. That explains it.
Bah Humbug! Are you doing your usual devious trick of creating a new thread just after I’ve posted? Your fiendish plan won’t work this time, because I’m going to re-post it
:
I was amazed to read a message written by none other than our esteemed leader who wrote
“I cannot understand why SeanT and others get so worked up about the EU - they are very much in a small minority. Before Christmas Mori asked respondents “What would you say is the most important issue facing Britain today? (Spontaneous)”. there was no prompting.
Guess what the proportion was of respondents who said one of Common Market/EU/Europe/EURO?
Just one miserly percent.
The vast majority of people just do not give a damn.”
I would have thought that someone who is clever enough to be a professional gambler, albeit a Lib Dem one, would be aware that the EU significantly influences a whole range of policy issues.
What issues were named as the most important by the other 99%? Immigration? Energy? Taxation? Criminal justice? Trade? Isn’t Lord Smithson aware that the EU makes most policy in those areas as well? The figure of 1% above is completely meaningless in terms of judging how important the EU is.
12 - “The guy’s a proven coward”
I agree but can you think of any other Labour MPs who aren’t?
They stood by and let Blair start an illegal war based on lies. Each and every one of them should be in a war crimes tribunal. Yes some made very eloquent speeches, a couple resigned from their government jobs, but not one of them had the guts or the principles to resign from the Labour whip.
I don’t see a single Labour MP who has the guts to stand up and say that the party of spin, deception and gerrymandering is not the party they joined.
For “Gordon Brown telling friends” read spin doctor telling reporter. As Nick Robinson says in his blog Brown is a man who “sees questions as a risk not an opportunity”. PMQs are not really about the questions and answers but about the competence and talents of the party leaders.
Gordon’s considerable weaknesses as a PM have been exposed by PMQs and I sense from reports on the China/India trip that the lobby hasn’t been too impressed by his abilities on the China/India trip. As PR dragging the major political reporters round in four days or so in close proximity with lots of set speeches and hurried visits and not enough sleep can easily turn negative but a Blair or Thatcher equivalent trip would have been reported very differently .
WRT the previous thread, I’d be surprised if the Conservatives *didn’t* pick up 25 seats in the North and Scotland. A net gain of 25 there would still leave them short of a majority.
You’re right that any changes Gordon Brown makes now will be seen as a response to his poor performance. I’m sure PMQs isn’t any fun, but I never heard Blair crying and moaning about it because he was so damn good at it.
http://lettersfromatory.wordpress.com
JohnLoony @ 14 — the question is not whether the EU matters at all but whether it matters electorally. The answer is no, unless one of the big parties campaigns on it.
There are a number of issues like this, things that ought to be important but aren’t. The West Lothian Question, PFI, and electoral fraud to name but three subjects that could easily become scandals if, and only if, Cameron were to take up arms. Trouble is, he might become hoist by his own petard.
In the American races, in particular on the Republican side, we see the reverse phenomenon: voters attach tremendous significance to things that do not matter because they are not matters for the president, such as gay marriages (states) and abortion (the constitution and judiciary following Roe vs Wade 35 years ago yesterday).
Politicians and citizens must surely worry about the EU and all its works but as punters we must embrace cynicism.
14 - Why would anyone get worked up by a little thing like who runs Britain? Should it be run from Britain or from a foreign land? Of course, according to Labour, it is racist to say that as William Hague found out.
The EU machine has one objective, to create an unachievable utopian superstate by progressively stealing away the right of nations to run their own affairs and this is against the will of the people. The result will be a disaster.
Letters From A Tory @ 18 re Blair & PMQs.
Blair reduced two sessions of PMQs to one. To what degree that was due to fear or to his contempt for parliament, who can say.
Certainly Blair — unable to think on his feet — was not particularly good at PMQs, as Hague regularly showed. If it appeared otherwise, it was because his other opponents were bad, and because the Prime Minister has natural advantages, especially the last word.
20- what kind of disaster- the 20th century saw a few in Europe as nation states ran diametrically opposed foreign policies.
The Euro is now proving something of a success to those countries that joined.
Again- brilliant Mike, using these clips to bring events to life
U tube is just fantastic- we use it with elderly relatives to reminisce about music, history, events that were dear to them. Can be very emotional.
21 “Blair — unable to think on his feet….”
I don’t think so, John L! Whatever your criticisms of His Tonyness (and I have a load, with some bigoted prejudices thrown in for good measure) surely you have to agree that he was masterful at thinking on his feet. Good repartee, good question answering skills and (even more importantly) good question avoiding skills. The guy was a genius in that department.
has anyone noticed that in Blair’s early period he say “yeah” quietly to himself as a sort of encouragement. Very peculiar.
22- The backlash will come when the people of Europe realise they are ruled by unaccountable faceless over-paid dictators in a law making factory in another country who they cannot remove through the ballot box.
There will be an uprising, a rise in the far right, terrorism, conflict and ultimately war. This is human nature. If you supress people, eventually they will rise up. The EU will not work.
John Lennon might have imagined it. Imagine there’s no countries. It is a very naive child-like view that if all countries became one there would be peace.
PMQ’s do matter, but perhaps not as much as we think. They raise the morale of the backbenchers, when their, ‘champion’ does well etc. Out in the, ‘real world’ probably not as much as we think or would like.
Gordon Brown is telling friends that the public is being increasingly repelled by PMQs
How would he know? It’s more likely they are increasing repelled by him.
11 It may be possible for millions of people to watch PMQs via Broadband but the number of those who actually bother is in the thousands many of whom post on here .
22 tell that to the Italians, the Greeks and even the French.
Food for thought!
http://www.guardian.co.uk/society/2008/jan/23/socialtrends
PMQs immediately after the conference season was pretty brutal. Not only the “First PM in history to flunk an election because he thought he was going to win it” line, but also Brown wetting his pants right away and getting the shakes.
The man’s his own worst enemy. Cameron can ask moderately good questions, safe in the knowledge Brown will show himself up.
As for changing the format, if the length of time/number of questions for opposition leaders is unchanged, he could get away with it. A meaningful change (like giving Cameron 3 questions instead of 6, or cutting the time to 7 minutes) would get him pilloried by all but the most loyal sycophants.
Start the day with a smile!
How the Daily Mash sees the economic crisis.
http://tinyurl.com/2v3jq2
Augustus Carp @ 24 re Blair thinking on his feet. No, which is how Hague so often undermined him. Blair was, however, very well briefed, and always had the choice of whether or not actually to answer a question.
From previous thread to stjohn @ 54 and others.
Betting on Spreadfair is rather like making love to a beautiful but virtuous woman.You woo and woo her and nothing happens…..but when it does,it is well worth the wait.
Regarding the slight dispute between Richard and Mike.Both are ‘right’ in their own way and Richard was correct to state that Spreadfair has been very stong for Labour.Where Mike is corrct is that all that has changed and that the roadblock looking to Buy LAB seats in the low 270s has finally disappeared.That is the most significant feature.
I love Spreadfair even given the penurious commission rates I have to pay there because you can trade in and out of positions on that site without having to offset the actual Spread…. twice.
It would be nice if Spreadfair were to offer lower comm. rates on long term markets.
Not gonna be a good PMQ’s for Brown, northern rock, shares slump, marching coppers, and this. Cameron is going to have a field day. Brown can’t get rid of PMQ’s now, no matter what high minded arguements he comes up with to try andjustify it, it will be reported as cowardice(which is what it really is). Cameron will be able to get a great deal of running out of the subject if he does try, damaging Brown’s already heavily tarnished reputation even more.
PMQ’s is reported in most of the papers, and on the news.
Interesting headline in the, ‘Times’ hmmmm Dave might have some explaining to do!
http://tinyurl.com/3bvdst
6 mirthios Lawson made agood point on Newsnight last night that it is Balls and Brown’s job to sound positive and shore up confidence.
He then spoilt it when Paxo asked him if he believed them and he said something like, ” Good heavens, no”.
PMQs: if I were Prime Minister, I should seriously consider reverting back to the twice a week schedule.
Today’s should be safe for Brown insofar as the gobal crash seems to have been shortlived. Will he be out of touch owing to his foreign escapades though? Does he know about kebabgate, for instance? Cameron could have some fun with that sort of topic: things that will resonate with the public but might not have made it to Brown’s briefing.
37, I doubt people care. As an atheist, it seems bloody silly for me to permit selection based on which holy book you happen to believe, but deny it for academic ability.
It’s hardly the burning issue of the day, with global financial turbulence, Northern Rock, police inquiries into Harman (and possibly Hain) etc etc etc.
It’s going to be difficult for Cameron to come off well. He’s either got to ruthlessly attack Brown’s record, but it may not stick and he’ll look childish. Or he’s got to address other matters, and he’ll be accused of not getting to grips with the big affairs of state. I think the Northern Rock pseudo nationalisation is his only option, but I hope he leaves it for Clegg.
40
‘So Mr Bin Laden! why exactly, do you want to send your son to St. Pillocks?’
37. Its not hypocritical to be hypocritical to a bunch of hypocrites.
42. Your old school, presumably.
How did you guess?
There must be something in this religious education. My father a devout RC, sent my brother and myself to Catholic schools, we are both devout, atheists!! Dawkins rules as far as I’m concerned.
The interesting thing is the Times, could have chosen anything out of that interview to highlight, they chose that.
37. Can’t really see anyone caring.
On the subject of PMQ’s, it’s the evening news soundbite that counts and Cameron knows that. That’s why when he’s put in a moderate performance, it is usually still a success as the killer soundbite is out there.
37. From a school’s point of view the fact a parent is willing to give up their spare time and attend church services they are not interested in is a good indication that the parents are committed to their child’s education and will encourage them to perform and behave well at school. You don’t have to believe to do this for your child. There is also nothing stopping parents from working class backgrounds to do the same, showing their commitment to their child’s education. I’m sure many do.
Cameron is now referring to Brown as “that strange man in Downing Street”.
Good stuff - Brown’s transformation into a Major-style figure with added weirdness continues…
37 Cameron actually makes a very good point on “Active Citizens” which points to a dichotomy in the State’s approach.
We all hear about need for parents to be involved in their children’s education and the education ministers have for years pushed for parents to read to kids, parents to engage with schools and teachers etc. The State proclaims choice but then limits the ability to actually make the choice in the name of “fairness” - really an ideological choice to address failure in social mobility above parental choice. The problem though IMHO arises from too few good schools and low parental aspirations and reducing parental ability to choose further reduces aspirations.
As the experience of Chinese and Indian immigrants shows mobility can be obtained through active parenting where parents put education and aspiration first. Allowing more diverse provision in schools would tend to address the shortage of places.
47
Arse!!
PMQs is a weekly ordeal and a humiliation for Brown who, as a control freak and a bully, becomes distressed when he has to account for himself publicly. As the economy continues to deteriorate over the coming months and Brown is put increasingly on the spot, it’s no wonder that he is looking for excuses to scrap PMQs.
50. Isn’t it time for you to go to the Day Centre now?
8 well spotted Hary. Balls blatantly lied when he claimed we had less debt than most other major economies. Head for head we even have more than the US and considerably more than the rest of Europe. Of course the useless interviewer didn’t pull him up on this outrageous reversal of the truth.
coldstone @ 50.
Is that a desperate plea for a Jack W poll?
39 “Today’s should be safe for Brown insofar as the gobal crash seems to have been shortlived.”
On the contrary, it’s only just got going and big debtor nations like the UK and US are going to be clobbered far more than most.
Finkelstein concurs that a downturn is good for Brown
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/comment/columnists/daniel_finkelstein/article3234420.ece
Do PMQs really turn the voters off?
Mike, I think Politics, per se, turns the voters off, as witnessed by the long-term and increasing decline in turnouts. All the important battles have either been won or given-up as lost causes, and there is really no point to it any more. Both main parties are now an interchangeable, hidden coalition of sleazebags out for themselves, who have conspired to turn this once great country into a passive, dumbed-down, politically-correct, anti-social, multi-cultural ant-heap…
Next time, I doubt if Lab+Con combined will receive 70% of the vote on a derisory turnout.
55. Excellend ground from PMQs - “can the PM confirm what the former Treasury lapdog Ed Balls said on the Today programme regarding the Uk’s borrowing compared to other nations…”
52
Day off today!
The interesting thing isn’t what Dave said (although its pretty naff) its how the Times reported it. The response of the, ‘Blue Harpies’ was pretty interesting though.
53 “Of course the useless interviewer didn’t pull [Balls] up on this…”
If you are an interviwer with the weird swivel-eyed lizard that is Balls, do you:
(i) grill him at length about why his answers don’t stack up; or
(ii) do the bare minimum of talking - and get the hell out of there?
39 - “the global crash seems to have been shortlived.”
Posted at 9:06am. 40 minutes later, FTSE, CAC and DAX all down more than 1%.
Hope you didn’t bet on it.
56 Dream on Danny boy, dream on
Do the Tory posters on this site find any interest at all in competing to see who can insult Brown using the most childish language?
I know your leader is setting a bad example but for the sake of readers to this site shouldn’ you aim higher?
63, Blue harpies and blue-rinse brigade are both insults directed at Tories here by others. Glass houses.
Also, Gordon Brown smells of dog poo.
63 - Any thoughts on the Oscar noms?
63 Perhaps you’d care to give us examples of this “childish language” or are you just adopting Brown’s tactic of squealing UNFAIR! when you don’t like to hear the truth?
39-Sai yesterday even before Fed cut that a dead cat bounce was inevitable. I have a feeling we will end the week lower than we started on the FTSE.The worlds Bourses will burn whilst the economic great and good fiddle in Davos.
64
If you didn’t behave like, ‘Blue Harpies’ you wouldn’t be called that.
First of all my own position. The present government has run its course, third term governments are always a disaster anyway. By not calling an early GE, Brown has made a difficult situation worse. The next GE has already been lost by Labour, although the Tories will struggle to get an overall majority, certainly a working one.
That almost certain knowledge, does not make me enthusiastic for what will follow, certainly a government led by as Simon Heffer called them, two PR spivs, like Cameron and Osborne.
What Cameron said was pretty silly, not earth shattering, but silly, to try and defend it like the, ‘Blue Harpies’ did is as silly as pretending that Labour will pull the present disaster round.
19 John L voters attach tremendous significance to things that do not matter because they are not matters for the president, such as gay marriages (states) and abortion (the constitution and judiciary following Roe vs Wade 35 years ago yesterday).
I disagree. The president appoints Justices to the Supreme Court. Any adjustments to abortion law at state or federal level have to pass muster with the Court, and you can be sure that for instance any future justices nominated by Hillary will rule down efforts to tighten abortion law.
In respect of gay marriage it is a state issue but with significant federal implications e.g. federal income tax, inheritance taxes, social security benefits etc etc
You can bet your life that if there is a recession Brown will be doing his best McCavity act again and letting Darling take all the flak.
My guess today is that Cameron will focus on Livingstone to press him on whether the PM supports Labour’s candidate for Mayor in London.
In early 2004 Brown was fiercely opposed to Ken being re-admitted to the party.
60-It was interesting to hear Balls being interviewed yesterday.
When asked what he cooked best he replied” I make a pretty good souffle”
That sums him up..all air and no substance
68, I forgot, was it Smithson or the Lord God who appointed the lefties here arbiters of truth and justice to dispense insults as they see fit, and then complain when rightwingers insult not themselves but their glorious leader, Comrade Brown (who smells of dog poo, incidentally)?
Negative Brown stuff - Northern Rock, Hain’s naughtiness, Harman’s naughtiness, police pay, saying bye bye to Konnie Huq instead of doing whatever it is dictators in bunkers do etc
Negative Cameron stuff - better at PR than Brown (apparently this is a negative now that the Tories are good at it), supports middle classes who bend rules to get their kids into good schools
You’re right. Let’s ignore the £55bn tied up in a single bank, or the plunging FTSE, or the fact that a Cabinet Minister (and soon maybe two) is being investigated by the police. What really matters is that Cameron said something about parents trying to get their kids into good schools. The outrage!
65.UKpaul(only!) At last a sensible post! I’m about 4 films short of seeing everything in all the categories I’m interested in. But I’m hoping I will have in about ten days time.
Overall apart from best DOP where the standard was high I’d say it is the worst year for ages. In the category of DOP’s Roger Deakins is a cetainty and I’ve seen all the contenders. As is Ratatouille for best animation
I havent yet seen Julie Christie or Daniel day Lewis so I might be short of best actor and actress. It’s really boring how long it’s taking for some films to hit the UK. I might have to settle for tapes. Have you managed to see Juno? I’m really struggling to find it.
68 You should no better than to challenge the Shameron stance on here in any way . The Cameroon psycophants are ever ready to produce a chorus of abuse to try and shout you down .
75. Two bad puns in two sentances, you are trying hard.
75 and I should know better than to type no instead of know .
73 Really! I hadn’t noticed that people like seant and a few others were reluctant to indulge in the odd insult, not that I’ve ever complained!!
74 “At last a sensible post!”
Yes - one about the Oscars. Which has how much to do with political betting? Although admittedly a happy diversion, Roger - as in this instance you do know of what you speak.
[78] Yup, if we’d had a Tory government Northern Rock would never have collapsed and neither would the stock markets.
If anyone has punted £50 on the “British Social Attitudes” survey, I’d be really interested to know what percentage of Labour voters don’t have a “bias to the poor” - it’s hard to believe that such voters have any strong partisan attachment, and the number would serve as a useful proxy for Labour’s “core vote”.
65 Yes can we have Roger’s thoughts on the oscars.
Good to see a nice level of debate on here. The usual suspects on both sides throwing casual insults.
82 - Yes there is often more venom here than in a snake farm, but often it is merely the misapplication of wit and sarcasm.
74. NuLab rule no1 - play the man not the issue. See David Kelly for example no 1.
Wow, record showing of Creatures this morning - you’re really not fans of the Government, huh? Note the parallel claims that the whole of PMQ is important because millions see it live via broadband, and Cameron doesn’t need to do well if he gets a soundbite because so few people see it live.
FWIW I’ve disliked PMQ for years - disliked it when TB was routinely triumphant, dislike it now. Lots of people feel that way, and think it shows politicians at their worst - or, worse, that we’re always like that. But clearly we have to put up with it - a change at this point would be interpreted as weakness.
The actual effect is mildly polarising, I think. Most people don’t care, but people who dislike the government are reinforced by clips of Cameron saying something sarky, and people who usually vote Labour are annoyed by the same clips. It’s a factor in maintaining the Labour core vote in the 30s, but also a factor in raising Tory certainty to vote. The effect on backbenchers is similar - unless the result is very one-sided everyone always thinks their man did better than expected.
The only bit that really matters in terms of shifting votes is the extent to which it reinforces a media narrative - it gives a hook to hang a current theme on ‘X pasted Y yesterday on issue Z’. If the media is hostile - and currently it’s certainly not helpful to Labour - then critical PMQ reports are ammunition and if you don’t get a clear win then the media can report it any way they like - which is currently likely to be anti-Brown.
6
‘Ed Balls, the Schools Secretary and Gordon Brown’s close ally, went close to suggesting that (interest rate) cuts were on the way. “The good news from Britain’s point of view is that inflation is low, and is coming down,” he told the BBC.’
Inflation is low,and is coming down,is Balls on drink or drugs?
I can’t help,as a Labour voter,but let the kamikaze option cross my mind:
(a)Recent history shows winning a fourth term goes down like a lead balloon
(b)After three victories,you can honourable lose,saying’Ah well,enough felt it was time for a change’
(c)Were Labour to lose it would be by only a narrow margin
(d)Based on my lifetime,including Heath when I was only a toddler,within 2 years something massive would go bang in DC’s face,shattering his credibility,and almost certaninly dooming him to lose the subsequent general election
So even if DC winds up leader of a minority Conservative govt,I would watch with interest,waiting for near-certain disaster..
O/T - Another 4 missing discs, this time court cases.
86 Not unless he’s the former MP for Chelsea:lol:
89 Portillo? Or Sir Nicholas Scott?
85. So in summary - “yes it’s important” ?
86 If you had listened closely to what Mervyn King said in his speech last night , there was a clear hint that interest rates will be cut at the next opportunity .
91; “yes but not very”.
I’m sure that if Brown had the knack for PMQs that Blair had, he would be rather endeared to the format and not even consider criticising it.
However, Brown struggles with PMQs and so has taken a dislike to them - how predictable.
A Swansea Blog
[87] No - if Cameron forms a minority government, no one will expect or require him to go a full term - he’ll go back to the country after 18 months or so and get a “proper” majority. Also in that situation Labour wouldn’t be able to “clean house” properly (or function as an effective opposition - not that it will anyway), Brown may even hang on as its Leader.
It shows up a merit in the American system - what you can’t do in eight years, you can’t do. Even her most devoted admirers would be hard pressed to list Margaret Thatcher’s successes after 1987 - all the rest of us can remember is the Poll Tax, such a good idea that not one single member of the Conservative Party to-day wants it back.
17. Sean Fear.
How do you square this with your “region-by-region” seat breakdown predictions?
I believe you estimated a Labour tally of ~250 seats, which would imply a loss of approx. 110 Labour MPs.
Does this all compute??
94 “Brown struggles with PMQs and so has taken a dislike to them”
I predict he will develop a strong dislike for General Elections too. Around about May, 2010…..
92. Yes and he also said that inflation (CPI) was likely to breach the 3% limit.
Brown has stuck to announcents of increases in tractor production since 1997, with comparisions of grain harvests in 1989-1997. His focus on Tory economic mismangent is begining to ring hollow.
He and his party managers are very reliant on obscure backbenchers reading from prepared scripts to highlight rising levels of treatment for boils, plague and pestilence in their consitituencies. Perhaps there have been significant improvements but given the levels of spending on the NHS is this unsurprising.
Camoron’s six questions, and Cable’s two allow the opposition parties to put pressure on Mr Has-Bean. This is when Brown appears to lose his bottle, his answers rise in volume, almost to a shout, his complexion reddens and his hands shake, unless they are grasping the lectern. Brown is saved from the pressure by interjections from Gorbals Mick, who invariably rides to the rescue. Brown appears to be keeping his anger under control but one wonders if he will really lose it in front of his own MPs and the cameras. Compared to his early PMQs there has been some improvement in his approach, but all too often he resembles a wounded bear, angry and too ready to strike out at random.
PMQs rarely give backbenchers the chance to ask questions, and have clear answers from Brown. They cannot stand up and ask supplementry questions. He can get away with not answering the questions from the opposition before some helpful NuLab minion asks about tractor output. His tactic of trying to ask questions of the Leader of the Opposition is an attempt to avoid his own responsibilities.
Brown has been sitting next to Blair for a long time, and has learnt little about it. Given his reluctance as Chancellor to appear in the Commons to be held to account or questioned on the shambolic admistration of Tax Credits, is this really a surprise? Essentially opposition questions can’t be micro managed, controlled, but even with the dice loaded against them the opposition parties can undermine Brown’s standing. If he can’t take the rough and tumble of PMQs, he really ought to reconsider his position.
97 - He already has, he thought about it didn’t see the polls and ran away.
Interesting clips… Two point spring to mind.
1) Blair was great
2) The Tories, smiling away like idiots, were in total denial about their position. At least the Labour benches aren’t as glib
I rather enjoy PMQs, and I think that it is important for a Prime Minister to get a reality check once a week. It also forces the Prime Minister to get into the detail of the burning issues of the week and to understand his own Government’s position on all such topics with sufficient clarity to be able to articulate it. I don’t see how that can be a bad thing.
85 nothing to do with holding the leader of the government to account then. Supine MPs and a political class merely interested in its own perpetuation is a depressing fact of life. the fact the person being questioned isn’t required to actually answer any questions is the worst feature of all and stretches back as far as I can recall from when it was only on the radio.
O/T Alex Salmond has a new friend:
“Alex Salmond and I have virtually never even talked about this job but I know for a fact that he - and anyone else who’s representing Scotland, unless they’re the enemy - wants billions of pounds to come into Aberdeenshire and Scotland.”
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/scotland/north_east/7203148.stm
85: Nick, the two things that most turn people off PMQs are the PM not answering the questions (plus in Brown’s case asking them too) and the ‘Can the PM tell me how wonderful he is and how pants the Tories are’ type questions.
101. Rather extreme straw-clutching by the sullen and dwindling band of Labour supporters today.
92
Balls must be one of the few people in this country that thinks that ‘inflation is low and coming down’,he needs to get out more.
Train fares,energy bills ,council tax,food and petrol ring any bells?
I guess its just a question that if you repeat a lie often enough (the consumer price index as a measure of inflation)you eventually believe it.
107.
Inflation is low and coming down.
Balls.
108 - Balls misspoke he didn’t mean to say inflation, but Labour’s poll rating is low and coming down.
98. 3% on CPI must mean 7 or 8% on RPI.
Still Balls says inflation is coming down so that’s ok.
105 Three things actually. You forgot to mention Cameron’s usual refusal to acknowledge the point made before continuing with the next rehearsed soundbite for the evening news.
I watch PMQs and often see a different live feed to the ones many conservative supporters see. Yes Brown’s bluster is awkward but Cameron’s over confidence is equally off-putting.
107. I note a recent trend toward ministers referring to ‘the problems in America’ as the root cause of the UK’s economic difficulties.
It’s all starting to sound very reminiscent of the pathetic ‘world recession’…’green shoots’…style rhetoric of the early 1990s. Next we will have Balls et al telling us that unemployment is a price ‘well worth paying’.
112 - As long as we don’t have Alistair Darling doing a Piaf impression!
112…..the pending unemployment of 100+ Labour MPs will of course be hugely beneficial
I’ve just been reading both the Cameron Times interview and the way SKY have reported it - Haven’t seen any TV coverage yet but there seems to be a change in the way he’s portrayed. Though no fan of his, I do think there’s an aspect of “Well its his turn now, let’s start the kicking”.
The Times frontpage is interesting in its choice of headline. The interview, although highlighting no great depth, was wide ranging in the subjects touched upon (with the exception of the usual name-calling), yet the media narrative is one of ‘fudge’ on the one single issue of faith schools.
Is this the start of the media move back to focus on Cameron? Just a quick observation.
111. Cameron is supposed to ask the questions, not the PM. When Brown asks a qeustion back Cameron is under no obligation to answer or even acknowledge it.
re 111. This is questions to the prime minister - not questions to the leader of the opposition and the Speaker should always, rather than just occasionally, stop Brown from responding by asking questions of Cameron.
Interesting though that in the extracts shown above John Major was using the same technique of answering a point by putting a question.
OT, very sad news about Heath Ledger. He was great fun in First Knight, and brilliant in Brokeback Mountain.
Just goes to show. He was apparently someone who had it all - talented, handsome, rich, adored, beautiful wife, lovely kid, all his life ahead of him - then he breaks up with the wife and kills himself with prescription pills a year later.
RIP, mate.
116 But my point is that he asks questions simply designed for the headline & soundbite rather than showing any great depth or knowledge of the subject. And by not responding to an answer shows him as unable to debate the subject, which all helps to fuel the belief that many voters have of him, namely that he is merely PR driven with a desire to be PM and no more.
It just puts people off PMQs and fuels the general malaise about politics. I do expect the turnout to be very low indeed at the next GE.
117 - Indeed and he got swept away by the biggest landslide since 1906.
As we all know, we now live in a broken and lawless society because of the policies of New Labour.
At least for half an hour a week, Labour MPs aren’t damaging the country by coming up with more flawed policies.
In the same way that dangerous mental patients can do no harm to us when they are locked up, perhaps PMQs should be extended from half an hour to forty hours.
That would be the safest thing for society. Keep them in the asylum and let them out for weekends only.
[105] - PMQs is a national embarrassment for the two reasons you mention, though I might also add that the leader of the Opposition often asks questions as though he were scoring points in a sixth form debating society, rather than on the important matters of the day to the most powerful person in the country.
Although it would seem to be letting Brown “off the hook”, something I am reluctant to do, it is tempting to suggest that it would benefit politics in the country for PMQs to be abolished.
Seriously, what benefit does the absurd media circus serve?
117. Mike
Interesting though that in the extracts shown above John Major was using the same technique of answering a point by putting a question.
And look what good it did him!
117 I do agree with you regarding Brown by the way, my original point was merely to inject some balance into the initial diatribe - with the wider view of politics in mind.
I for one would welcome more Labour posters on this site and less of the partisan claims.
I’m not a Gordon Brown fan - wasn’t well before he became PM and his performance as PM is as bad as I expected. Realised today that part of this was the first coup attempt in 2004 when Tony Blair was at his weakest with combined health and family problems, which led to the “I won’t seek a fourth term” announcement. While recognising “that ’s politics” couldn’t help but compare Blair’s response to Brown losing his daughter in 2002 to Brown’s use of difficult family problem to Brown’s advntage.
So many of those complaining on here about PMQs - “it puts people off politics”, “it feeds voter apathy”, “no wonder turnout is low”, “it makes voters dislike politicians” - are Lib Dems and Labourites who, by coincidence, are right this minute trying to deny the people their democratic rights.
i.e The chance to vote in an EU referendum. The chance to participate in a crucial political decision affecting the entire country. The chance to take part in the democratic exercise that was PROMISED BY ALL PARTIES IN THEIR MANIFESTOES.
Really. What more can you do to fuel apathy and dislike of politics than deliberately lie to the people? And take away their right to vote?
Apart from Peter the Punter, Lib Dems and Labourites are hypocritical scumbags.
IMO Brown pays Cameron an unnecessary compliment when he asks him a question. Does anyone really care what this week’s position is from the other side of the commons? It will be different next week.
IMO Brown needs to find other ways to draw attention to Cameron’s weaknesses, rhetorical mocking worked well for Blair. Maybe just lowering the temperature will deny Cameron the oxygen of publicity. If I were Brown I would praise Cameron and welcome his conversion to the middle ground.
119. Erm, its PM questions. The rules are that the PM is asked questions by the house, including the leader of the opposition. Cameron not answering isn’t him not wanting to debate the issues, but him following the rules as set out. He asks the questions, Brown answers (or doesn’t, as he seems mostly to do) that is the point of PMQ’s. If Brown wants a proper debate he could go on question time (he never ever has) and have one, or do a public debate with his opponant(same again).
118. SeanT
Yes, very sad news.
Apparantly, the fact he “had it all” was part of the problem. He was very comfortable with it.
“Fame” is sh1te. Everyone thinks they want it, but as soon as they get it, they can’t handle it.
This whole thing reminds me of River Phonenix. Kurt Cobain was another.
So many actors/musicians turn to drugs and suffer depression. They can’t define themselves, or their lives anymore.
Britney Spears and Amy Winehouse are two of the latest to go off the rails.
And we can think of more who’ve had problems… Pete Doherty, Robbie Williams, Owen Wilson, McCaulay Culkin…
The list goes on and on.
Screw fame. Not interested.
126 “Apart from Peter the Punter, Lib Dems and Labourites are hypocritical scumbags.”
There’s nothing more off-putting than a self-righteous tory (he smiles)
129. “He was very comfortable with it.”
Doh! That’s “He was very UNCOMFORTABLE with it”!
OK - so I’m a Blair fan - and I hardly ever watch PMQs since Brown took over, but Brown can’t just cancel PMQs because he’s rotten at it. I mean, he’d have to cancel his premiership too, if he were to be consistent. Oh, no - that wouldn’t worry him, would it?
I have plenty of videos at my site on Blair if you want to see how it SHOULD be done.
Btw, Blair called PMQs “a blood sport, with me as the quarry” - and he said, “it’s all bo**ocks”. Yet Hague, IDS and others admitted that he was unbeatable in the forum.
So it’s not just me …
http://keeptonyblairforpm.wordpress.com/video-pmqs-prime-ministers-questions-house-of-commons/
128 If there is no debate then what’s the point of PMQs?
After the hubris of recent years it’s refreshing and timely to see the Labour muppets squirm as their chickens start coming home to roost. Carry on cackling and squealing lads, it’s the beginning of the end for you lot and your increasingly weird leader’s appalling misgovernance of this country and it’s economy.
Mrs Balls is as bad as her husband on BBC2 now. It’s the kids I feel sorry for. Imagine what it’s like when they ask for their pocket money to be increased. Browbeaten into accepting nothing because inflation is going down.
130. I’m just stating the facts. I’m not insulting anyone or trying to provoke. Labourites and Lib Dems simply ARE hypocritical scumbags, and I think the more thoughtful ones, like Nick Palmer, would probably admit that they are hypocritical scumbags.
I mean. How dare they complain about voter apathy and a dislike of politicians, when they behave with venal arrogance, and deny us a chance to vote on the future of the nation, a vote they explicitly promised us?
The disdain for he electorate is arrant and repugnant. And this behaviour is precisely why people are not bothering to vote anymore. Why should they? The government doesn’t want to know. The government thinks the people are stupid. Too stupid to understand the issues and therefore vote “correctly”.
Given the chance lefties would abolish elections and decide everything by just asking each other what to do, at agreeable dinner parties in Canonbury.
I would argue PMQs is very important.
It is the single event in the week where the leader of the country must come down from the comforts of the Downing Street Bunker, into a hostile environment, and face questioning. It is democracy in action.
Sure the shouting and the bawling looks a bit strange, but it’s all to stoke this atmosphere of discourse and debate - genuine, honest, lets-get-down-and-fight, courtroom-style debating. It is very important for our democracy. To say a PM who doesn’t have good debating skills and is therefore poor at PMQs and disadvantaged is to say that they are not a good PM - debating skills are very important for the top job, you need to be able to communicate and get your point across.
Yes, sometimes *even* in a hostile environment!
This is why PMQs is so good. It is a surrogate for the country. Some people cheering you on. Some people shouting back at you because they think you’re not doing a good job. Every Prime Minister should be able to handle that. And if they cannot, I honestly believe in our British version of democracy they should not hold the position.
133. The point of PMQ’s is exactly as it is called, for the prime minister to answer questions made by members of parliament. If Brown wants to change it to a debate he can do, but he’d have to add a great deal more time onto it each week as half an hour wouldn’t be long enough for that, and be prepared to come under more pressure, which we know he’s been unable to handle so far.
Ted.”I for one would welcome more Labour posters on this site and less of the partisan claims”
While the site is completely overwhelmed by very young (I hope for their sake) Tory posters who write nothing that’s either interesting or amusing but just chant insults not only will you not see Labour posters you wont even see sensible Tory ones. You Ted are a rare exception today but it’s noticeable that the standard is so low that even Printz has come out of retirement
Casino Royale, Labour notionally now have 348 seats, so IMO, their likely loss at the next election is 100.
‘Ed Balls, the Schools Secretary and Gordon Brown’s close ally, went close to suggesting that (interest rate) cuts were on the way. “The good news from Britain’s point of view is that inflation is low, and is coming down,” he told the BBC.’
I wouldnt expect anything less from the man primarily responsible for the mess we’re in. During Brown’s 10 year tenure as Chancellor, it was Ed Balls, the Harvard economics ‘genius’ and ex FT journalist who really ran things, as Brown “didnt have too much of a grasp for figures”
” 20- what kind of disaster- the 20th century saw a few in Europe as nation states ran diametrically opposed foreign policies.
The Euro is now proving something of a success to those countries that joined. ”
Good for them… the pounds not doing bad either thanks.
37. This is a massive clanger from Dave and a great opportunity for Labour. They could say,
“Labour’s policy is to allocate a proportion of parents/children who aren’t from the faith in question, so that non-Catholics, for example can legitimately send their kids to a Catholic school. Why doesn’t Dave support Labour’s policy?”
and
“If as a parent you lie to the school then you are implicating your kids in this lie. Is this a good way to bring up children?”
But will Labour pick up on this? Is there anyone at Victoria Street or Downing Street who is now specifically responsible for rebutting Opposition errors? I think not, and that’s partly why Labour is f*cked.
139. But you Woger, will always be with us, like gen1tal herpes, or the poor.
Because you have nothing else to do, after your retirement from your, ahem, “career”.
I think Gordon Brown is a sincere person. The trouble is he thinks he has to be economic with the trith in PMQs and that is difficult for him.
Blair was a master manipulator and revelled in the untruth, whereas Brown finds it uncomfortable to “perform.”
The answer is simple. Brown should just tell the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth.
It would be a breath of fresh air and only then will the people not be turned off, because right now it is all to do with scoring points and repeating pre-prepared soundbites, avoiding the question and playing to the cameras. It is all a badly played charade.
139. ‘young Tory posters who.. write nothing that’s either interesting or amusing but just chant insults ..’
But Roger that sounds just like you. The only difference being that you are an old gyet and should know better.
133 Surely if it is to be a genuine questioning of the PM on topics of specific interest to MPs, then parameters should be more tightly drawn - do we really need a high profile media dominated bearpit? Surely the place for “politics” is in big debates on controversial subjects (and I hesitate to mention this) such as the current EU constitutional arrangements debates.
Cameron’s perfect put-down when Brown resorts to asking him a question would be to say “My Right Honourable friend seems a little confused; the purpose of this session is about the Leader of the Opposition asking questions of the Prime Minister; I’m not yet the Prime Minister…
Part of his job description is to answer questions; if he won’t, I’ll take it he doesn’t want the job anymore. A pity, after he took so long and destroyed the careers of so many others to get it”
We’ve got some BBC wonk on the Daily Politics telling us the last 4 PMQs have been victories for Gordon Brown and David Cameron is ‘in trouble’.
Yes. Oceania has always been at war with Eastasia.
149. It’s Michael Crick. Well known Labour man.
I always give you the benefit of the doubt Sean and assume you have a drink problem which is worse at night. In my “career” I’ve met many who have the same problem and it rarely gets better.
149. Last week they were slagging off Brown’s policy of not answering questions and asking them though, very inconsistant.
136/
1/ If there was a referendum, Labour and Lib Dems would have to talk about the EU, something they avoid doing at all costs.
2/ Their campaign would be based around a pack of lies and scare tactics.
3/ Even so, they know they would probaly lose. That is why there is no referendum.
4/ They know all of the above is true but of course they would not admit it.
37 / 143 et al. - In my opinion the continuing (and recently enhanced) state recognition and funding for faith schools is a national disgrace, fostering hypocrisy, encouraging religious superstition and breeding future intolerance.
149. Crick is usually sound. A very strange thing to say. The only way Cameron is in trouble in PMQs is because he seems overconfident, and is beating up poor wee Brown too easily. That can come across as arrogance, and he needs to watch it.
But “in trouble”? Pah. The proof is in the pudding: Brown would hardly be complaining about PMQs if he had beaten Cameron in four sessions running and he had the leader of the Opposition “in trouble”. Brown would, in that situation, be relishing the fight.
Indeed I think this bleating outburst from Brown is yet another poor tactical move. It shows he is scared of Cameron.
As any burglar could tell you, like the ones I met in prison, you should never show the attack dog that you are scared.
Del boy… lol
There’s the media quote for the reports.
154 So what? In my opinion it is furthering an education based on ideas and values, rather than mere Gradgrindism and “facts”.
154 Spot on.
151. And that ugly dig perfectly demonstrates my point.
151. lol. It’s 7pm in Bangkok and I am just about to open my first beer. This is me sober. If I was drunk I would probably have compared you to gen1tal warts, not gen1tal herpes, which is more insulting but less accurate.
You funny old dear.
Wow! What a change! He ought to go to China more often!
Looks like Brown has given up the asking questions back at Cameron tactic anyway.
Why does no-one pull him up on 2% inflation?
One thing they should do is ban sycophantic questions by members of the governing party.
161 - Yes and preferably stay there with all the other autocrats
161. Best of all, he should stay there. He would be much more at home.
140. Thanks Sean.
And does that square with your excellent regional breakdown?
It looks like Cameron Flip-flopper is a growing theme. Could be damaging IMO.
Why on earth are Labour MPs continually allowed to ask questions which amount to little more than cheerleading for the government occasionally coupled with attacks at the Tories?
I couldn’t actually spot the question in the previous question from a Labour MP, all I picked up was “This government has low inflation etc.”
A Swansea Blog
168 - Yes like the Chameleon theme which died a death.
Clegg doing better.
168 The only flip-flop that counts at the next election is that by Labour and the LibDems on the Euro-referendum…
166 - Great minds…..
Clegg makes a fundenmental mistake in ‘bigging up’ the Tories by mistake…
I’m amazed no-one’s mentioned the police protest yet - News 24 is showing a split screen with PMQs on one side and helicopter shots of the march on the other.
Brown going for lowkey approach. Trying to stay calm. Prevnts him looking like a nutter with DTs, however it makes him look subdued and diminished.
Oh dear, just as I’m writing it he loses it. “we we we we we”. Ouch.
If the main purpose of PMQs is to boost morale of the troops then Gordon seems to be having a good time….the Labour benches seem in good voice. Gordon is getting better, but will never match his predecessor, just like Major.
Ken Clarke finally asking a decent question about the economy….should have come from the Front Bench - but Gordon has a good come back.
I agree Crick (usually) sound - I think Cameron’s ‘trouble’ might stem from no longer routinely flooring Gordon - he’s getting score draws at best….
Brown’s answer to Ken Clarke was hilarious….does he actually believe what he was saying? other than that he has been pretty good, possibly because most questions on the economy which is his favourite area
1997 the economy was in a difficult state according to the great leader. What was that treasury quote to him??
On the question of flip flopping, was Gordon a supporter of the ERM?
172. No evidence that voters care as much as obsessed Conservatives about the differences between a constitution and a reform treaty. Never heard it mentioned on the doorstep, only on blogs.
Zogby now reporting a huge 19% Obama lead over Clinton in South Carolina (43-24-15). Whether this is a response to the fractious debate or not remains to be seen. I’d take Zogby with a pinch of salt - everyone got New Hampshire wrong but they were reporting the biggest Obama leads there.
Brown is much better than usual, but Cameron got his soundbites in.
Nick Clegg shamelessly borrowing from Vince Cable (and why not?). The “running scared of the Conservative party” was cutting and dangerous for Brown.
Ken Clarke’s intervention was amusing.
Brown may not enjoy PMQs, but it’s not for his entertainment anyway. For those that think it frivolous, note that it has so far dealt with safety on London’s streets, flooding, Northern Rock, the state of the economy and the minimum wage. These are important matters to get the Prime Minister’s views on.
177. I haven’t seen many recent PMQs. But the last one was a clear win for Cammo. This one is indeed a draw so far.
If Brown was winning why would he whine about PMQs? Derr.
Ken Clarke floored him. Brown has done better on the other questions though.
“Police numbers are up in London”
True, look outside.
“We are spending more on defence than ever before”.
Than *ever* before? Surely not!
I know that I shouldn’t, but I half-hope that a fracas ensues, and that the police on duty start baton charging the ones not on duty. it would be nteresting to see how the press would report it.
Traditionally, the media use the Met’s assessment of the number of people involved in any demo. Presumably, today’s figure will be VERY large.
183 - Cameron doesn’t have to anihilate Brown every week. Major had good PMQ sessions it didn’t really do him much good!
Nick Winterton, Honours for Questions shock.
181. To me the debate looked like Hillary shrewishly attacking Obama - somewhat unfairly - and his soundbite about her and Bill “tagteaming him” was very apt.
Maybe others saw it that way. Who knows. I hope he does win SC by double digits, cause he might make a comeback. But I have my doubts, unfortunately.
Than *ever* before? Surely not!
In inflation adjusted terms, or % of GDP, certainly not - but in absolute £ terms, quite possibly.
184.
:) 
:) 
Well I thought Gordo was OK - he’s getting better. He surprised Nick Clegg by saying that NR nationalisation is still a possibility - presumably to scare the pants off greedy private shareholders.
Dave is good on rhetoric but weak on the substance. Maybe Osborne should have put his name forward after all?
It would help if Harman could look less as if she was about to go to a funeral. Also if Straw could stop doing the lizard thing with his tongue.
184 I’m sure it will be spun as vindication of Labour’s policy of more visible police…
192 - Straw lizard thing, we don’t need David Icke fantasists on here!
179 Yes, I heard Alistair Darling saying the same thing, yesterday. I don’t know where they get that idea from. He also claimed inflation was lower than in 1997, and that the government had repaid a lot of the national debt.
167 I haven’t yet finished surveying the regions, but I’d expect so. Broadly speaking, I’d expect something like Conservative 310-330, Labour 240-250, Lib Dem. 45-50, Others c.35
The chanting of statistics is less than inspiring.
“2084 more midwives”. “800 more turnips annually harvested in Lincolnshire”. “Seventeen fewer children have visited the nitnurse in Walsall since December 2001″.
Someone slap me awake with a kipper.
But let’s face it, he’s never going to do well at PMQs. If he bores us all to a goalless draw every week, that probably constitutes a victory of sorts.
Cameron showed his overconfidence by asking questions on the economy. It was not only clear that Brown was a master of that brief but also that Cameron did not understand even the replies to his questions. I might be biased but I felt it showed what is likely to happen when Cameron’s limitations ad inexperience are really exposed
197. “I might be biased”
Surely not, Roger?
re 110 no - with interest rates coming down the difference between the CPI and RPI will narrow. If CPI goes above RPI it’ll be wonderful to see if the government can keep up the spin with a straight face, or will start referring to the RPI again.
197 - ‘I might be biased’…… and the Pope might be Catholic…..
197 Roger - do you say stuff like this to normal people in the real world face-to-face? If so, what is their reaction?
Oh it’s absolutely ridiculous Labour playing the victim of the ‘nasty’ Cameron.
They seem to forget how they absolutely *hounded* Major prior to 1997.
This is for David Cameron for next week’s PMQ’s
Apologies for the length but well worth reading
197. Brown is master of nothing, he can’t even answer a very simple straight question.
How much is the exposure on Northern Rock?
How long will it take to recover the money?
How much are they paying Goldman Sachs?
How can anyone make substantive assessment if the Government never answer the real questions. All Browns bluff and bluster means nothing. If he can’t answer the questions he’s incompetent and if he is hiding the answers then they must be unacceptable. Either the sooner he is gone the better for the country!
203.
I hit the submit button too soon.
Must be too much Glenfiddich in the blood,
Taxpayers to take on Northern Rock risk
The quality of the bank’s lending means the taxpayer may be left holding the baby, say Philip Aldrick and Katherine Griffiths
It’s official. The taxpayer is now the long-term owner of a bunch of loans too risky for commercial banks to touch.
Northern Rock’s mortgage book was not sufficiently attractive for Royal Bank of Scotland, Deutsche Bank and Citigroup, so it’s ended up in state hands.
Ultimately, how much of its £25bn loan the taxpayer will recover depends on how well the crippled bank’s former chief executive Adam Applegarth wrote new business. It’s hardly reassuring.
Alistair Darling and the Financial Services Authority have been adamant that Northern Rock’s mortgage book is “good quality”. Addressing the House of Commons yesterday, the Chancellor once again stressed that the collateral against which the taxpayer is now secured is “high quality mortgages”. It’s a line the Government has stuck to firmly since the crisis struck on September 14. Then it said: “The FSA judges that Northern Rock is solvent … and has a good quality loan book.”
But it’s a line that’s looking increasingly shaky. For the first time yesterday, the Treasury acknowledged that the taxpayer may lose out. Outlining its proposed rescue package, it said: “Any losses would first be borne by Northern Rock, protecting the taxpayer in the case of underperformance of the assets.” In other words, once Northern Rock can’t bear the losses, the taxpayer steps in.
So what exactly does the taxpayer now own for its £25bn loan and £30bn guarantee? And just how “high quality” is it? Compared with peers, not awfully appears to be the answer. A key measure of mortgage quality is the loan-to-value (LTV) ratio, which measures how much of the property’s value the bank lent to the buyer. As the table shows, Northern Rock’s LTV is the worst among its peers. Strip out the behaviour of the first six months of last year and the picture is starker.
Northern Rock lent an average 78pc of the value of a home in the six months to June, just as the market peaked. The next closest lender was Alliance & Leicester, with 67pc. Break the numbers down further and it emerges that £3.3bn worth of mortgages were sold in the first half of 2007 with an LTV of more than 90pc, and another £1.46bn of riskier buy-to-let deals were signed. If Credit Suisse is correct in forecasting a 10pc house price collapse this year, Northern Rock will almost certainly have to crystallise a loss on these assets.
In total, Northern Rock has lent almost £21bn through its controversial “Together” product, which offers loans of 125pc on a property’s value, and £6.2bn of buy-to-let. Both products are considered higher risk, yet make up a third of the £85.2bn residential mortgage book. In all, some £26bn of its mortgages have an LTV of 80pc or more. On top of that sit a further £7.8bn of unsecured loans.
“Undoubtedly, Northern Rock has the riskiest mortgage book of its peers,” one analyst, who declined to be named, said. “Northern Rock was pushing the envelope. Any decline in the housing market will affect it more as its takes a higher LTV and has been lending most aggressively most recently.”
The bank insists its mortgage book is better than average. But the measure it uses is arrears levels, where it is ahead of the industry. One analyst said: “When a bank grows aggressively, the arrears levels seem proportionately low because the bank is putting on so many new mortgages - and mortgages don’t tend to go bad in the first year.” In other words, Applegarth’s ambitions were masking problems.
And those ambitions were certainly grand. As recently as February, he declared he wanted the bank to become the nation’s third largest lender - leapfrogging Lloyds TSB and Abbey. Pursuing the goal, Northern Rock wrote almost a fifth of all new UK mortgages in the first half of 2007 against its 7.6pc market share. At the same time, checks and balances that would have reined back Applegarth seemed to evaporate.
Insiders say a sensitivity check for buy-to-let borrowers to establish whether they would be able to meet their repayments in a rising interest rate environment were quietly dropped. Simultaneously, the treasury department, which was responsible for ensuring the bank had sufficient funding, was ordered to switch its reporting line from the finance director to Applegarth, who has no accounting or banking qualifications.
Other examples of a more cavalier approach to management also began to emerge. In March last year, he and other executives decided to book an extra £39m profit by selling an “insurance policy” - known technically as an interest rate swap - which was meant to protect the bank against rising interest rates and which could have lessened the effects of the worldwide credit crunch. In June, the bank set up a subsidiary called Kielder Property Management to buy its customers’ repossessed homes, potentially profiting from their woes. Others in the industry shied away from such practices.
Applegarth originally made waves by being the first to move his mortgage qualification process to an “affordability” model, which assessed customers on their ability to meet monthly payments. It was the start of the roller coaster in income multiples across the industry that saw them peak with offers of up to six times salary.
Such aggressive tactics now risk costing the taxpayer. Analysts say provisions on Northern Rock’s mortgage book are woefully low. “Either they believe they have the best mortgages in the market or they simply have not been provisioning enough,” one said.
The fear is that a fall in house prices will expose the mortgage book as poor quality, a far cry from the FSA’s reassurances.
One senior source said: “In housing recessions, 80pc of losses are from 20pc of mortgages. With all the 90pc LTV Northern Rock has - that is the stuff which will go bad first.”
Whatever is in that bottom 20pc of the bank’s mortgage book appears to have scared off the lending banks and prompted the Treasury to demand from any bidder “a significant buffer to protect taxpayers’ interests”.
Last June, Northern Rock had a total “buffer” of £4.43bn - £1.75bn of retained earnings and £2.68bn of preference equity and tier one and tier two capital. But there is unlikely to be much of retained earnings left after paying running costs, staff retention bonuses and loan interest. Hence the Treasury’s insistence that any bidder inject up to £1.4bn in equity.
In other words, Northern Rock is likely to be able to absorb only a 4pc deterioration in the value of its £113bn of assets before the taxpayer takes a hit. Given the nature of the bank’s mortgage book and the outlook for house prices, that’s reason to be worried.
last line ‘either’ should read ‘either way’
197. Given your weak grasp of economics (and most other subjects)Roger, how do you know whether Brown is a ‘master of his brief’ or whether Cameron understood his replies?
199 well when Mrs Thatcher didn’t like RPI she had the tax and Prices index invented - the moment that went above RPI guess what happened… the TPI was a great idea but it demonstrated too clearly what real people were really experiencing so was obviously shelved.
Cameron showed his overconfidence by asking questions on the economy.
…because the Northern Rock saga has been such a triumph for the Government???
Kaletsky doesn’t think so and he’s got several advantages over you, Roger. He’s not biased. And he does understand economics.
Cameron is right about faith schools. People want to send their children to them. I’m a governor of a C of E School and we’re heavily oversubscribed each year.
But how can Cameron, who says he attends Church as often as he can, condone people pretending to have a faith?
This makes him look very slippery.
205 which is why brown said at pmqs that administration would lead to ” a fire sale of northern rocks assets resulting in massive losses”!
Why this wasnt picked up i dont know but he basically admits that the loan book is worth substantially below face value and why he KNOWS the taxpayer will lose billions on this deal and wont answer the questions.
Brown not asking questions is probably because he saw how daft a defence it was. The main problem with PMQ’s for Brown is that while Cameron may be ‘at best’ getting score draws, he comes off better on the news. He asks cutting questions, with good soundbites that people will remember and want answered too. Brown’s answers are usually very dull, negative and defensive. They get ignored, as they usually contain lots of figures and drag on.
211. The reality is that administration would mean a fire sale of NR’s workforce and the Labour-supporting network it supports in the NE. That is Brown’s real concern and has been since the very start.
I thought (once again) Cameron won hands down, purely for the fact that Brown keeps screaming and bellowing while Cameron remains relqatively calm and funny. Do people really want a PM that keep bellowing when answering questions? It comes across on TV as though he’s slightly loopy.
I miss UK polls. When is the next one?
” 172. No evidence that voters care as much as obsessed Conservatives about the differences between a constitution and a reform treaty. Never heard it mentioned on the doorstep, only on blogs. ”
It’s not about the referendum anymore… it’s a trust issue.
Both Labour and the Lib Dems promised you they would hold a referendum… now they are going back on that promise and denying you a right to have your say.
That’s it in a nut shell really and all that is more or less needed in leaflets, presented in multiple ways obviously with a little more flesh to the bones should the need arise.
Anyone who thinks this issue will not damage Labour and Lib Dem vote share in many wards and areas will have a shock in May should the Conservatives choose to promote it.
Any issue where the Conservatives stand alone against both Labour AND the Lib Dems is a winner for the blue side.
214 Well judging by the muted comments of other Conservative posters on here , your glasses are much more blue tinted than theirs .
SeanT: if we call you a p1ssed up philandering libertine whose literary efforts led to a well deserved “bad sex award” to a first time writer, all it means is that we have read your books.
Hypocritical? Sure, and so are you, but I’m b%**gered if I’ll be called a scumbag by the guy who writes your prose. You have no evidence of scumbaggery, and the fact you think you do makes you at least as much of a hypocrite as the rest of us, so ultimately, as a comparative, your insult is meaningless.
Enjoy Bangkok…
217. I haven’t seen PMQ’s yet, so I’ll comment later. However, over the past few weeks Cameron has easily outdone Brown in the news stakes. His questions get press coverage, Brown’s replies are barely mentioned (mainly because of their oft-repeated content).
216 If you want to waste the space in your local election leaflets talking about an EU referendum instead of the issues that people are really concerned about then it is you who will get a shock in May .
Perhaps Cameron needs to study Blair as Leader of the Opposition to see if there are ways in which he can undermine Broon without having to resort to short phrases for sound bites. Have we a wololf the wed nosed wiegndeer….
I don’t recall Blair receiving so many helpful interruptions from a Speaker. He seems remarkably keen to help out Brown.
Broon announces that inflation is still only 2%, is he not paying his own train fares, petrol, gas and electiciy bills? Perhaps he needs to check his own expense claims.
125. If the Brown coup rumours have substance it ought to make Broon’s moral copass spin.
220. Why? will the Lib Dems only lose 200 seats this time?
Personal verdict on PMQs - Brown better, a bit more confident, sounded more assured, but still reeling of lines and lines of, well, lies, basically. Managed to increase morale of Labour MPs which will be good for him.
Cameron - Average performance for him (meaning still pretty good), got his soundbites in, pugnacious. Didn’t get a killer blow in but should be good for the news.
Clegg - OK, a shame he led on NR after Cameron, but gave the Tories a bit of a boost (and Labour a drubbing) with his clanger about Brown running scared from them. Dependant on his aims, that’s either a good or bad thing.
Average all round really. Nobody got anything momentous in. This isn’t going to change the political status quo or define any of the leaders.
Is it me, or is Brown trying to re-write history. It is generally accepted that in 1997 the economy was growing well, and the government was in surplus. Brown is tyring to paint a different picture, one of a poor economy and him riding in on a white charger to sort it out. This kind of outrageous lie will damage him, as even most labour MP’s will have to admit that they inherited a good economy.
222 The chances are slim that any party will lose/gain more than 100 seats this May .
214 “It comes across on TV as though he(Brown)’s slightly loopy.
Only slightly?
222 The chances are slim that any party will lose/gain more than 100 seats this May .
In regards to the site, it does have a massive problem imo. I was a regular contributor from about feb 2005. The site then was full of people who could discuss issues objectively. Just re read the threads and compare them to today.
Today’s contributors are full of hyperbole and immaturity. It has to be said that the amount of people that believe their own and each others hype to fall into a group think mentality is beyond belief.
How exactly can: ” Clinton = brown = toast” be constructive or accurate.
plus often it isn’t even funny. I swear the word tractor should be put on the banned list. really brown is not a communist - let…. it….go…..
Political betting has become a bubble. People seem to believe that scoring cheap points on the here makes one iota of a difference. To all the Tories who seem to almost reach orgasm over their crowing and jeering, maybe your time would be better spent outside knocking on doors and talking to the electors.
Predicted response: ” the view from the bunker”
224 - He’s been doing it for 10 years so he isn’t going to stop now is he!
222 THe chanes of any party losing/gaining more than 100 seats this year are slim .
I thought PMQs was a draw. At least Brown didn’t ask Cameron any questions this time and he didn’t mention Cameron’s role in “Black Wednesday” but Gordon did stammer a bit and went back to his old trick of reeling off statistics.
Leave off Roger. I want to pick his brains on the Oscars when he’s seen all the films.
228 Hello Roger.
232 no its not roger
Dull PMQs.
The best bit was Brown’s hilarious lie when he claimed to have inherited an awful economy. Mean Ken Clarke, leaving behind a huge surplus! Maybe Brown genuinely has the terms surplus and deficit confused, and that why he thinks he’s doing so well?
Cameron should up the pressure as much as he can, get Brown shaking, angry, make the man suffer. Brown can’t take pressure, he can’t think on his feet, though he can do a passable impersonation of a statesmen.
re 186 Augustus it would be mor entertaining to see the marchers claiming there to be 25,000 on the march but the “police” estimating it to be only 5,000.
234- Dull PMQs indeed - Fortunately a new Italian general election is on the way!
233
221: “Perhaps Cameron needs to study Blair as Leader of the Opposition to see if there are ways in which he can undermine Broon”
Well, when it comes to undermining Brown, there’s none better at it than Mr Blair!
225 227 230 OK Mark we get the message
186. Augustus Carp
228. from the past - Couldn’t agree more. Sadly this has even been one of the better threads. The ones on North American politics don’t have this problem (for obvious reasons). It would be great if the UK politics threads were similar in content.
241. Out come the Labour PMQs astroturfers, right on cue.
Are all of them 15 years old and illiterate?
241, Lamont’s ERM decision was backed to the hilt by Brown.
Compare the amounts lost on black Wednesday vs Gordo’s bargain gold sale and the bill for Northern Rock..
242. I think you are right. I heard a rumour that being 15 and illiterate were pre-requisites for joining the ‘Brown Youth’.
WRT the previous thread, I’d be surprised if the Conservatives *didn’t* pick up 25 seats in the North and Scotland. A net gain of 25 there would still leave them short of a majority.
I disagree with both of you. I ran some numbers through my patented swingometer. These numbers were a reverse ‘97 throughout GB (in line with some December polls) with the latest Scotland polls used for that country. The Con gains through North West, North East and Scotland totalled exactly 25 (22, 2, 1 respectively)BUT they achieved an overall majority of 68.
So 25 Con gains between those three regions is an extreme upside, but is not necessary to achieve even a working majority.
241. Oh really. Cameron wrote speeches, he didn’t dictate economic policy. I suppose Brown and Darling have some 25 year old who’s dictating their economic policy. As for the point about working for a TV company that nearly went bankrupt, I’m sure Cameron didn’t negotiate the football deals. Pathetic.
242 Talking of Labour astro-turfers, I wonder what happened to Gabble? I do hope he got out of the Bunker - but I worry that he is still in there, his internet privileges revoked…
I suppose Brown and Darling have some 25 year old who’s dictating their economic policy.
Given the quality of the recent Labour policies proposed - it wouldn’t surprise me!
:0)
‘I suppose Brown and Darling have some 25 year old who’s dictating their economic policy’
Based on the NR fiasco you might be forgiven for thinking even that degree of maturity isn’t being deployed…
It’s funny that so many Labour posters on PB sound like they’re advising the Caucescus as they were just about to go on the balcony! It’s definitely bunker mentality stuff.
I was in the Chamber for PMQs - and believe me the “..we are the party of economic stability…” is a one-club monotone schtick doesn’t even inspire Labour backbenchers
In fairness, it’s not just Gordon - he has surrounded himself with a sycophantic B-team, who are - with a few exceptions - charmless and useless in equal measure.
Cameron beat him fair and square again - on policy and substance. All Labour can do is revert to type. Playing the man not the ball, which is - as they say - so last century.
Footsie/CAC/DAX plunging again
[137] - Well, then, I’m sure you’ll be able to tell me about all the PMQs when the asking of questions had a material impact on the running of the country, rather than merely feeding the media’s desire for entertainment.
All the important issues already get debated fully following statements made to the House by the responsible minister - the lost CDs, the Westland scandal, Arms to Iraq, the Norway campaign debates.. Chamberlain was not exposed by a lack of support at PMQs, was he?
There is precious little, if any, serious questioning, and even less honest answering. I can’t see a point to it, except to exaggerate any difficulties one or other of the party leaders might be in.
252. Soc Gen….
251 In which case Cameron is very last century if you read his comments about Brown in the Times.
IMO the fact Cameron is attracting the Flip-flopper tag is potentially more dangerous to him than his clear association with Black Wednesday. It will be a theme at the GE that resonates with some of the other stuff we all ready know about Cameron.
Also, we shouldn’t underestimate that events pay a huge role in how interesting/effective PMQs are.
Northern Rock is still in limbo until either 4 February or a ‘buyer’ is found. Still no report from the police/electoral commission/parliamentary watchdog over various violations.
Interesting way that Clegg played it. Pincer movement from the united opposition? I don’t think so, but if they attack from both sides it could be effective for both opposing parties.
252 Footsie currently down below Monday close…
What will the Fed be having for breakfast tomorrow I wonder? Another half point?
Apparently many reckon by March-April US rates will be down to 2.5%.
Of course, America can play with tax cuts and the like which sadly we cannot, due to our bloated deficit. Mind you, their house market is much worse.
Underneath it all, Cameron’s a nasty piece of work - it will be his undoing.
258 - The problem is that the US Fed seem to be ignoring the inflation risk.
Cameron win as usual, because the media can use his soundbites for the next 24 hours as the basis of stories…
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/7204203.stm
259 Gabble’s alive!
And back with a gratuitous insult too.
(Are they making you type this? Give us a spelling mistake if yes…)
255. So let me see - Cameron is lightweight and has no experience but 12 years ago he was running the exchequer ?
Can we expect any more opinion polls this month?
260. That’s because there is no inflation risk.
260, yeah I read somewhere that some people believe that the short-term rebound would have occurred anyway, and that the long-term prospects will be unaltered or perhaps worsened by over-egging the rate cuts.
jsfl at 245 etc. - is that really you? You used to put thoughtful pro-Conservative posts, but recently you seem to have applied for Creature status. I’m not commenting on PMQs, good or bad, for the reasons mentioned by our past poster and kjh.
Quite a while since we saw a UK poll. Anyone have any idea what it will say? Hard to predict, but I don’t think the public is much engaged in politics at the moment, so I’d expect no huge movements. Tory lead of 7, say?
263 - You appear to have missed the word “badly” between “exchequer” and “?”. Don’t worry - easy mistake to make.
261. This passiage from Cameron is an extremely accurate description of the man;
“But he reserved his strongest words for Mr Brown’s support for extending the period that terrorism suspects can be held without charge for up to 42 days - a move opposed by Tories, Lib Dems and some Labour MPs.
“I am afraid that he sees this as a totally political weapon: let us try and make the Tories look soft on terror,” he said.
“That is my problem with our prime minister: he looks at every single issue from the point of view of what is the right dividing line that divides me from my opponent, not what is right for the country, and I think that is what he is doing here.”
That absolutely hits the nail on the head of what Brown is about. And ultimately it will be this psychological flaw that will see him turfed out of Downing St. in 2010.
265 - That is insane, the US rates were on a similar trajectory to UK rates before the credit markets seized up.
One for PMQ’s next week (mis-use of taxpayers money)
Man, 82, guilty of police assault
An 82-year-old man has been found guilty of assaulting two police officers while on his way home from a church mass on Christmas Eve.
Former Kent County Councillor Frank Gibson pushed one officer and twisted the thumb of another, Chatham Magistrates’ Court heard.
He was given a six-month conditional discharge and ordered to pay costs.
Gibson, of Windmill Street, Gravesend, who suffers from arthritis, had denied the charge on Tuesday.
Any news of arrests at the Police demo in London?
New EU Treaty gives full rights to everyone EU citizen. You will be able move, work, travel or vote & stand as candiates in any election in any member state. 20 million EU citizens from one member state could move to another member state and get preferential treatment in services, housing etc etc which will destroy the nation state. The United States of Europe is just round the corner and will be irreversible. Expect another 5 million voters registered in time for 2010 GE!!! Labour could win it because Winminster will only be regional parliament by then.
See this story
Who are these people who think like this - - I have always thought that their birthplace was in the lib dems - in local councils up and down the land you certainly find loads of them doing not much more than worry about these kind of issues much to everyones elses detriment , but Nulab have encouraged the trend and taken it into new realms of silliness
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/education/7204635.stm
218 Cicero.Suggest you look up “hypocrisy” in your dictionary if you have one.Entirely in your interests - you look such a fool when you don’t understand the words you are posting with.
267, anything from 5-8 seems likely. Be surprised if it were more or less than that. Nothing exciting’s happened since Christmas due to Rock not being nationalised or sold and no conclusions from the various police/electoral commission enquiries.
Looks like Dave has upset Melanie, still thats not difficult!
http://tinyurl.com/3dsure
‘Bloody marvellous you can never find a copper when you need one, when you don’t, 18′000 of ‘em turn up’.
Q4 growth rate was only 0.6% and analysts expect it to slow further, much further and we will be in contraction.
270. Correct Mr.Hoover - but now everything has changed. Asset prices have fallen sharply, the banking sector has taken huge losses and is tightening credit conditions significantly, and growth has ground to a halt. Even commodity prices are weakening. In the light of this, there is no inflation risk.
Good day to be a burgler
272. Really? All the Turks living in Germany registering to vote in Cyprus could be interesting.
272 Greater Romania Party wins Folkstone!
278, but pay is rising by a few % whereas energy and food bills are climbing rapidly. Inflation isn’t 2%, unless you remove everything that might raise it.
278 - I think there is still inflationary risk in the US economy, and the Fed need to be careful that in seeking to avoid pain now they create a double bounce with accelerating growth in Q3/4 or later accompanied by galloping inflation and hte necessity for slamming the brakes back on before the economy is robust enough not to tip back down again.
276. I don’t know why people are surprised that Cameron should be in favour of Middle class parents gerrimandering the system to their advantage. After all it was at just the time that Thatcher was declaring there to be be no such thing as society-just family units that ‘Dave’ felt compelled to join the party. Nothing hypocritical that I can see?
282 Gordon’s insistence that inflation is still 2% is his greatest exposure to seeming out of touch with common voters. They just don’t believe it. It is far removed from their experience of what this year’s income buys compared to last year. Especially if you are very poor and/or about to have the 10% tax break removed. His base supporters are going to be his biggest critics on this one.
220
‘If you want to waste the space in your local election leaflets talking about an EU referendum instead of the issues that people are really concerned about then it is you who will get a shock in May.’
A couple of lines on parties keeping their election pledges would suffice?
267. You might try setting an example with some thoughtful posts yourself Nick, rather than the shallow spin and widespread labelling of other possters as ‘creatures’ we have had from you of late.
Fraser Nelson on PMQ’s.
http://tinyurl.com/2puazu
280,281.
Sounds funny, but once Treaty signed, all you to do is move to a member state of your choice then get on the electoral register and then you will be able influence politics in the new state, minority politics will grow. I predict that the UK will have a Treaty referendum after 2010 but there will be a large number of pro EU Treaty voters moving in the UK from the continent greatly increasing the chances of the ‘Yes’ result and that will probably be the result in the future.
275. Little story from The Herald with a suggestion that the Electoral Commission doesnt appear to know what the penalties would be, or whether it has the ability to set them.
http://www.theherald.co.uk/politics/news/display.var.1985987.0.Watchdog_admits_probe_weakness.php
Harry. Why don’t you try just once or twice to contribute a comment that doesn’t solely consist of banal criticism of other posters?
Who knows you might even find something interesting to say.
272 - You will be able move, work, travel or vote & stand as candiates in any election in any member state
No. The Reform Treaty makes no subtantive change to voting rights as they currently exist. To quote from Article 17b:
Citizens of the Union shall enjoy the rights and be subject to the duties imposed by the Treaties. They shall have, inter alia
[….}
(b) the right to vote and to stand as candidates in elections to the European Parliament and in municipal elections in their Member State of residence, under the same conditions as nationals of that State;
291. Roger - why don’t you follow your own advice?
I watched PMQs for the 1st time this year.
I’m afraid Cameron (also applies to Osborne) comes across as “Thick Tory Toffs”, Brown is using the “flip-flop” argument about Northern Rock, but ultimately he is saying “thickos”
259: ‘Underneath it all, Cameron’s a nasty piece of work - it will be his undoing.’
Exactly Gabble. In fact I argue here that Cameron is in fact the devil!
Roger/Harry - take it outside!
292. Exactly. Part b says it all because there will be no national elections. Elections to Westminster will be regional and classed as ‘municipal’. If national elections continue, all EU citizens have to do is petition for the right to vote in each other’s national elections. Political takeover job well done. EUSSR 1 - UK 0.
I find the Labour posters on here grossly hypocritical when they attempt to blame Tory posters for the site ‘going downhill,’ or labelling them ‘creatures’ or somesuch.
In that respect, they have one great thing in common with their party sympathies: they cannot admit that they might also be at error.
If there is a problem with mudslinging on this site it is between the two sides - Labour and Tory - and all posters should remember that. Stop trying to blame one side or the other.
294. More hilarious astroturfing
Margaret Thatcher October 31st 1987
“And, you know, there is no such thing as society. There are individual men and women, and there are families. And no government can do anything except through people, and people must look to themselves first. It’s our duty to look after ourselves…”
David Cameron January 22 2008
“I don’t blame anyone who tries to get their children into a good school (by lying). Most people are doing so because it has an ethos and culture. I believe in active citizens”
Oh dear…here’s tomorrow’s lead story in the tabloids: http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/education/7204635.stm
285 - Over here, we get the BBC World News version of events. On the subject of the Police, they have shown very, very brief pictures of the march, superimposed with the “fact” that Police Pay has risen by 39% since 1997, whilst total inflation for the same period is ‘only’ 19%.
Some of us have been warning for some time that, if the Government is allowed to get away with these dishonest figures unchallenged, we will all be in trouble. We state pensioners, for example, will have our annual increases halved.
For all our sakes, shout loudly every time any politician uses the totally false CPI figures to refer to inflation. Please!
300. About the same line of argument as saying Gordon Brown and Tony Blair believe in abolishing the Lords, nuclear disarmament and leaving the EU.
After all, they became MPs in the 1983 election.
299. Harry. Can’t you help yourself? Why not go to an ‘agony aunt’ website where you can express your pain about other posters?
This is supposed to be for political comment.
304. I will if you will too Roger.
All this Labour v Tory one upmanship is playing into hands of the EU. The future of the UK including all home nations is at stake and all some people can do get advantage over each other. Pathetic. Sometimes I think we deserve to be taken over by Europe.
304/305 - This is getting like a marital row, stop it!
307 No, James, more like something in a nursery school.
297 - You’ll find it hard to find a legal case for regarding any national Parliament as a municipal council, pre or post-Treaty.
OT- “Stormin’” Norman Schwartzkopf endorses John McCain
http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0108/8059.html
302. Mirthios. As I understand it the figures relating to the police are accurate. This is why I think they are the wrong people to be taking on the government. Rather like the firemen who had huge public sympathy until it was learnt that they only worked three and a half days a week and many had second jobs and they would negotiate these Spanish practices.
310 - Secretary of Defence choice for McCain perhaps?
306. LOL. Is there anything Francis that doesn’t play into the hands of the EU in your fevered imagination!
307. Married to Roger? the horror! the horror!
311. I’d rather work 5 days a week doing my job, than 3 and a half as a copper.
312. Wouldn’t be a bad choice, certainly, especially if he leaked it after the convention. Anything keeping the conversation about national security is good for the GOP, non?
307. Thanks for your help james but I think Harry and I can deal with it!
309. I’m sure a new directive will come into force soon that will state that all EU citizens can vote in a member state’s national elections if there are no regional layers of government. EU citizens can already vote in Scottish, Welsh, Northern Irish and Greater London elections. England does not have a Pariament and has no regional government (except London) so they’ll be able to vote on a constituency by constituency basis as the next best option.
re 302 I do, but the trouble is that any government minister parroting this line on any media outlet will be allowed to get away with it by the interviewer.
281. Although the reform treaty makes no such measure to reform voting in member states national elections, surely this is more likely to bother, if anyone, the Spanish who will see a good deal of ex-pat Brits voting in their elections if this were to take place.
This would of course solve the taxation-without-representation issue of ex-pats who leave the UK and after 15 years cannot vote in either UK elections, in which they have almost certainly lost all interest, nor in their adopted country despite contributing to the relevant exchequor.
267. Nick P.
There are days when I just need to vent. Usually after I have had the misfortune of listening to your leader prevaricate, obfuscate, misrepresent and misconstruct.
Unfortunately, today was such a day.
The fact is he seems to do nothing else but, these days. It is becoming extremely tedious.
Add to that that I am not in good humour over the EU, the unjustified survival of Hain and Harman, the pathetic witterings of Smith (what a sad excuse for a politician and a Home Secretary she is) and the complete and utter unsuitability of Milliband for a senior position in Government.
On your own posts, I must admit that since you have chosen to persistently use the phrase ‘creatures’ I have stopped taking much notice of the rest of the content. It would seem to be a case of ‘the pot calling the kettle black’.
That said if you want to get away from the Punch and Judy mudslinging and talk about serious issues and I feel I can contribute I will be happy to do so.
300. It’s worth re-reading the whole of the extract from which the Thatcher quote is drawn in the context of education:
http://www.margaretthatcher.org/speeches/displaydocument.asp?docid=106689
“My Right Honourable friend seems a little confused; the purpose of this session is about the Leader of the Opposition asking questions of the Prime Minister; I’m not yet the Prime Minister…
Or how about, “I know the Right Honourable Gentleman wants to practice for his next job, but will he please focus on his current one?”
Schwarzkopf is in his seventies which, with McCain at the helm, could be seen as a problem rather than a vote winner.
322. Nick and Roger - is this the high level of debate you claim you are looking for? Or because this childish abuse comes from a Labour-inclined poster, is it OK?
306 Roger I don’t act like an arrogant fool. Your and some of your opponents’ behaviour is at times is totally unacceptable. Please stop making personal attacks on people you disagree and stop making assumptions and twisting facts.
The only condition in which I will accept regarding the EU is when England is given a full independent English Parliament where we can negotiate our own deals, nothing less.
318 - A directive wouldn’t trump a Treaty. As it happens, EU member states can currently decide whether they want EU citizens to vote in regional elections or not, and they don’t in some other nations.
318. Actually Francis, quite the opposite. The Constitutional treaty highlighted the principle of subsidiarity which reinforces the role of the member state.
Also you must know that the EU is not a body that sits somewhere and hands down obsequious legislation to which we have no say. Something the think about the next time you see a directive you don’t like - which British Ministers signed up to this and why.
That of course is IF you actually look at the directive, parroting UKIP propaganda is of course much easier.
323. Roger wouldn’t want to do that because it ruins his point.
By the way, the latest Clinton line appears to be that Obama doesn’t deserve to win because he will get a black bloc-vote (?!?). Now, sidestepping the fact that it was the Clintons who pushed it that way, how much lower can they go?
http://www.slate.com/id/2182569#obamaescape
328. My understanding of this treaty is that it has an enabling clause within it that means they won’t need to have any further treaties. Everything can be done by directives. Consequently, your point that a treaty trumps a directive is mute.
246 I’ll check, but I think your analysis is incorrect.
300
David Cameron January 22 2008
“I don’t blame anyone who tries to get their children into a good school (by lying). Most people are doing so because it has an ethos and culture. I believe in active citizens”
Roger, Was the bit in brackets actually said by Cameron or did you add it to smear him? If the latter then perhaps you should make that clear?
329. The problem is interpretation of the directives and the treaty. Yes, the new treaty does say that it wants to strengthen national governments, but only if they contribute to European integration. Also how accountable will the EU be? If Europe becomes more democratic and improves our lives I may change my mind. Change for the sake of chance causes problems, viz devolution in UK.
326. He cant be a Labour supporter or wouldn’t be able to spell ‘moron’!
UK Paul. You didn’t reply to my question at 74. Have you seen Juno yet?
334. No doubt Cameron is terrified by the thought of being smeared by the likes of Roger.
332 - is that it has an enabling clause within it that means they won’t need to have any further treaties. Everything can be done by directives.
I’m not aware of a general enabling clause anywhere in the Reform Treaty, nor can I find one. Which provision are you referring to?
337 Roger is a die hard Labour supporter and will support Labour no matter what they do. If Labour sent 10 million Jews to the gas chambers to die he would still support Labour. There are also like minded Conservative supporters and that’s the problem with UK politics and why fringe parties are forming.
335. The treaty doesn’t say anything about strengthening national governments is they ‘contribute to european integration’ which in itself is a phrase so pointless and ambiguous as to have no meaning either legally or politically.
It is used solely as a meas to frightening the wits out of people who read the Daily Express who are led to beleive that “The EU” wants to replace national Governments.
The point I was making before is that “The EU” includes as quite a strong power within it “The British Government” so why would the British Government actively seek its own replacement?
It’s just barking.
The treaty has no more constitutional relevance than say the introduction of ID cards, and certainly has less than all of the other treaties.
336 - It isn’t out until Feb 8th, although that’s not to say I haven’t seen it via other, ahem, methods.
Missed your 74, I was busy teaching. My comments yesterday were as follows -
“Oscar nominations just announced, my nomination tips all seem to be present and correct, Ellen Page/Juno, Depp, Atonement etc. As for winners I’ll have a closer look but There Will Be Blood stands a much better chance than at the BAFTAs and there may be mileage in laying Julie Christie (oo-er) whose price may well be too short (when they go up). Philip Seymour Hoffman if priced well for Charlie Wilson’s War (Javier Bardem again may well be a favourite but overpriced). ”
“With so much going it’s a little quixotic focusing on the Oscars but notable in the acting nominations are first time nominees 82 year old Hal Holbrook and 83 year old Ruby Dee.
John McCain wouldn’t do himself any harm by pointing this out (Dee has also been a well known civil rights activist and was a friend of MLK). “
311 - No, the figures are not “accurate” for the very simple reason that they’re the wrong figures.
The Retail Prices Index increases since 1997 have been:
1997 - 3.1%
1998 - 3.4%
1999 - 1.5%
2000 - 3.0%
2001 - 1.8%
2002 - 1.7%
2003 - 2.9%
2004 - 3.0%
2005 - 2.8%
2006 - 3.2%
2007 - 4.3%
Not bad figures but it still means that, simply to keep pace with rising prices - ignoring all the government and council tax increases - you need to earn £1353.20 today for every £1000 of salary you received in 1996. That’s an inflation rate of 35.3%, NOT 19%.
340. Ever heard of the Illuminati? Their aims are for one world global government and a federal Europe is their next step. Communism and fascism combined, pure evil.
Yes, I don’t think Roger has quoted Cameron accurately.
Talking of smears, there’s a remarkably weak attempt by Michael Eboda to smear Boris Johnson in the Guardian’s Comment is Free.
According to Peter Hennessy’s book on The Prime Minister, p 48. a regular time for backbenchers to hold the PM to account dates from 1960-61. The arrangements were changed in 1997 from then twice weekly sessions to the current 30 minute slot.
Prior to 1960-61 questions to the PM appeared from No 45 onwards on the day’s list of business. It isn’t clear how often the likes of Eden, Atlee and Churchill amongst others would have been available for taking questions from MPs.
Perhaps Broon is looking for less regular slot?
343 Don’t be so paranoid. The illuminati do not exist.
343. Mad
338. Tangent, you are correct in that my terminology may have been wrong when referring to directives. The actual correct terminology is that this treaty is a ’self-amending treaty’ and therefore there will likely be no further treaties but amendements to the current ones.
The new version of the Constitutional Treaty re-introduces the proposals from the Constitution which would make the treaty self-amending for the first time. Article 33 (which contains both IV-444 and IV-445 of the old Constitution) would allow EU leaders to change the treaties incrementally, without the need for a new treaty.
The full Open Europe article:
http://www.openeurope.org.uk/research/guide.pdf
346 347 they are secret societies who control and use freemasons to further their aims.
343 I’m a member, actually….
343. As I said at 340, barking.
343 - As Stephen Fry so succinctly put it, the Da Vinci code is “arse gravy of the worst kind”. So not really relevant to political discourse.
350 Ha ha you make me laugh.
351 disagree.
New thread - White House Race - Latest prices
346 Don’t be so paranoid. The illuminati do not exist.
Then who have I been paying my subs too all these years? Must cancel that direct debit right away!!
343 woof woof
353 We tried a giant conspiracy of Marxists, fascists, multinational capitalism, Freemasonry, Zionism and the Catholic Church, but all those meetings took up a *LOT* of time, so we are taking over the world through the Liberal Democrats these days.
349 As a professor of canon law here in Ingolstadt, Bavaria I can tell you unequivocally that the Illuminati do not exist and anyone who believes they do is paranoid.
I don’t think you can criticize Roger for smearing - ‘Pretending to have Christian beliefs’ is lying.
However I don’t think you can also criticized Cameron for what he said either (other than maybe being naive - but honest). Most parents will play the system to get their children into the best schools and who can blame them. The problem is the system.
Whereas in the past wealth was the deciding factor it is now biased towards those children whose parents have the aptitude to play the system.
348 - Yes. However, that would require unanimity, plus a vote in the EP. This would mean, in practice, that any self-amending pprocedure would still meet as many obstacles as a new Treaty, especially in countries where a change would a consitutional referendum.
O/T but did a Lib Dem design the Telegraph’s new election map? Or was it RodCrosby
A 10% swing to Tories from Labour results in a hung parliament (256 Conservative, 236 Labour, 122 Lib Dems and 33 others ) - even worse a 20% swing results in Labour 59, Conservatives 201 and Lib Dems getting 359 ! - that’s with vote shares of 15% Labour, 52% Conservative and 22% Lib Dems.
If that was true we’d never hear of “Fair votes” again…..
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/election-map/nosplit/election-map.xml
Personally, I blame it all on the full moon last night. It has a disturbing effect on the poor creatures, what with all that illuminance.
re 302 and others. On Brown’s preferred measure of inflation when he took over in 1997 it was 1.6% and falling so where’s this rubbish come from that he inherited a ruined economy?
Given Brown’s encyclopedic knowledge of tractor prodution it seems strange that he never remembers to include comparative references the size of the trade deficit in 2008 and 1997.
I hope that this conviction that inflation is 2% isn’t symptomatic of Brown lossing touch with reality.
361. They’ve got their Lab-Con and Lab-LibDem swings mixed up. Apart from that it’s quite neat….
[272] Sveijk- Look up the word “irony” will you… dear oh dear… talk about casting pearls before swine…