Miliband's turn for PMQs howler

I have been quick to criticise the Prime Minister on three occassions when I felt his attitude and language at the dispatch box have not been fitting for parliament - such as his remarks towards Tory MP Nadine Dorries last week.

Today the prize for PMQs blunder goes to Labour Leader Ed Miliband with his bizarre remarks about George Osborne "lashing himself to the mast ... not for the first time perhaps." That purile sexual innuendo might be OK between friends at a party but being shot across the Commons it isn't. Harriet Harman looked shocked, Ed Balls didn't know where to look. I think it was a genuine quip rather than a pre-prepared line. It doesn't make you cool, Ed, or win you any prizes for humour. You are not one of the lads. You are meant to be Leader of the Opposition. Start acting like it.

As for PMQs itself, clearly David Cameron wasn't on top form but luckily his opponent was (as usual) worse. Ed Miliband really must get a grip with his PMQs performances.

Cameron vs. Dorries

I have just caught up with a rather flat PMQs in which the most bizarre sight was that of David Cameron slapping down a backbench Tory MP, Bedfordshire's Nadine Dorries.

I have blogged before that I sometimes feel Mr Cameron isn't very parliamentary; his now semi-regular slips aren't "offensive" (as some claim) or "sexist" (calm down, dear) but don't represent a very statesmanlike approach to the House of Commons.

Today, Mr Cameron I feel did overstep the mark and stuck a toe into some very murky waters. Dorries asked the PM a typically straight forward question on LibDem influence over Free Schools, NHS and abortion laws and asked him to tell DPM Nick Clegg who the boss is. That question probably summarised the way a lot of Conservative MPs, activists and members feel. David Cameron - to be fair on him trying to speak over a loud House of Commons - then suggested Ms Dorries was "frustrated". The look on his face suggested he didn't take Dorries, her question or her concern very seriously. Unable to say anymore, he then said he'd give up on it and sat down. Mr Cameron made little to no attempt to answer her question and chose to smirk rather than engage.

Where does this end - does the PM get to choose which questions he answers or doesn't? Even if he isn't very clear or detailed in the answer, he ought to give one. To not do so shows very little respect for an elected MP.

What makes it worse is that David Cameron is bigger than this. He never has any trouble dealing with Labour Leader Ed Miliband so why he feels the need to treat a backbench Tory MP at the lowest rung of the parliamentary ladder so brutally and with such discourtesy is beyond me.

The Public & PMQs

"The Public don't like it, and I don't like it."

Well, that's the usual refrain of Commons Speaker John Bercow as things get a little loud at Prime Minister's Question Time. I have spoken before (here) about the fact that I like it when PMQs gets lively and think that the pressure, or otherwise, put on MPs in a good thing.

I cannot remember a week when Speaker Bercow hasn't stopped the flow of an arguement, and even on some occassions silence our Prime Minister, to repeat his charge that the public doesn't like the noise and bustle of the questioning. I know that Speaker Bercow was elected on a reforming platform and much that he has done I personally approve of, such as increased use of Urgent Questions, but his attitude and behaviour at PMQs does worry me. And what worries me more is that he uses "the public" as a method backing up his own views.

At the end of my previous post, I asked the question "who are these public that tell Speaker Bercow they want a santised PMQs" and it has played on my mind ever since. So I ended up putting in a Freedom of Information (FOI) request asking the Speaker exactly how many memebrs of the public have complained about the behaviour of MPs at PMQs.

After all, to change the whole tone of PMQs must suggest massive public fury; members of the public firing off angry letters and emails to vent their fury that MPs should ask reasonable questions in reasonable ways and recieve them in utter silence. They demand, these public, that the Speaker acts as a teacher would, insisting on decorum and threatening any MP, including the Prime Minister and both frontbenches with detention unless they play ball. He should even pick out a few and make jibes at them in order to control the commons.

So my FOI request asked how many pieces of communication (letter, phone call or email) the Speaker had recieved complaining about behaviour at PMQs. Go on, take a guess.

Well the answer may surprise you. The Speakers office only hold communications for sixth months, but in the half year until 22 July there were ...

... ready for it ...

... 36 ...

... yes, thirty six.

36 members of the public have complained about the standard of behaviour at PMQs in six months.

I am amazed that our bossy, overbearing Speaker has the cheek to call forth public opinion on this matter when less than half of one percent of one average constituency in the UK has registered a complaint.

That's fewer people than complain about your average Eastenders storyline and even fewer than most e-petitions, no matter how obscure the topic, gather.

And how many people have written to complain about the Speaker's constant interruption? Well apparently they are working on that figure for me as I blog. I am sure it'll be less than 36 but it shows how few people really, actually care enough about an issue to take up pen, keyboard or telephone and do something about it.

So let's hear slightly less about how the public dislike the format of PMQs, Mr Speaker, because at best the public haven't spoken yet on the issue.

PMQs Pleaser

I am a bit of traditionalist and a fan of PMQs. Some days, like today, are so manic I cannot watch it until nearly midnight but I watch it weekly during the parliamentary term. And every week Speaker Bercow, a man whom I admire for many of his reforms, rises up to tell MPs that the public doesn't like the way they conduct themselves and they ought to reign it in.

Well I wanted to say that, as a member of the public, I do like a robust and loud PMQs. It puts the PM under pressure and a good job too.

What really devalues PMQs is the shameless whips-handout style questions from both sides of the House and if Speaker Bercow wanted to improve the session he could tackle that first, closely followed by the MPs who read out lng winded questions designed only to get themselves in the local rag.

In a political world where most people view MPs as careerist clones, why would we want to do away with the one bit of the week that gives the Commons character and life?

Who are these "public" that tell Speaker Bercow they want a sanitised PMQs, because I'm not one of them!

Ed Miliband: Drowning, not Waving

Due to "unforeseen circumstances" I was able to watch PMQs live this week; and what an eye opener it was too. Whilst a lot of the media will focus on Cameron's ad-lib "son of Brown" line; which literally crushed poor Ed Miliband; I thought the line which summed up this performance was "drowning, not waving." When Mr Cameron said this of the Leader of the Opposition, he nicely summed up how I was feeling. Miliband led all 6 of his questions on the economy but my problem wasn't his choice of subject or even the poor delivery - but that I couldn't understand the point he was making. It was a bizarre mixture of accusation about dithering, complacency and Cameron's economic literacy. There was no thread to his questioning, no build up and, ultimately, no point to them. I though when watching; "ah, he's got a killer sixth question", but no such question came. Tory MPs left in buoyant mood, Labour MPs looked crestfallen. Apaprently you can get good odds on the man Private Eye has christened "Milibean" not leading Labour into the 2015 election. Just sayin'.

LibDem concern over PMQs lock-out

I had two different but connected moments today; the first is actually having the time to watch PMQs live (well, streamed over the net) and the other was meeting a local LibDem worthy on the way home from work who also watched the weekly parliamentary contest.

I hadn't realised when watching (we have now had 3 PMQs since the election) but my LibDem friend pointed out how much this event is now back to a Lab-Con battle and how the voice of the LibDems has been phased out. I doubt it will, but if the clashes make the news they will be without the voice of the LibDems; they have no spokesperson waving their flag - Cameron's 30 seconds on the news will meet Harman's (or whoever) 30 seconds with no LibDem. I never thought Clegg was a great PMQs performer as Leader, although Cable showed what could be done with just 2 questions and a few minutes of primetime news. Now this has all gone.

I pointed out to my LibDem friend that their MPs had as much chance of catching the Speakers eye as anybody else. Aside from getting a lecture on the mathematics which suggested this wasn't true (it did make sense afterwards) I was told that LibDem backbenchers would never line up alongside Cameron and Harman on the news.

I left thinking all thise was very true; I note that new LibDem Deputy Simon Hughes has promised to keep the party distintive. I wonder how they can do this without PMQs?

A Funny Way To "Lose" at PMQs

In the past few weeks there have been concerns, touted in the press and on the blogosphere, that Brown was finally getting one over on Cameron at PMQs; but some Tories batted this off saying that this was part of Dave's great plan to be soft on Gordon and help cement his position; after all, Brown is the secret to a Conservative landslide at the next election.

However today was a classic example of where Cameron wasn't interested in the win-lose-draw aspect. He had a fantastic issue - a news story in itself. A handwritten letter from Labour's Chief Whip Geoff Hoon to Chairman of the Home Affairs Select Committee Chairman Keith Vaz saying that he hoped that Mr Vaz would get an appropriate reward for doing a policy U-turn and backing the government in the crucial 42 days vote.

Cameron went rather softly on it; and the media and bloggers picked up on this and said he let Brown off lightly. I don't think so.

Cameron was putting an issue into the public domain - he got the good soundbite out (tell the truth, don't take us for fools etc) and has really been at the forefront of yet more good Tory publicity.

If he has wanted to bash the PMs head in, he could have taken all 6 questions on this issue and massacred him. Cameron chose not to, because he had done his job. Rather like Blair when his sprung the Cranbourne deal on Hague back in the 90s.

So for once, PMQs isn't about winning - it's about a narrative to an excellent media story. The Hoon-Vaz issue will never be sorted (because we'll just never know what that ! meant) but that won't stop this government taking yet another kick in the balls - because if just confirms that view most people had already about this shabby 42 days vote.

Clegg's first outing

Nick Clegg had a very competent first outing at PMQs, although to be fair he could compete with neither Cameron's brilliant performance ("You were the future, once...") or Vince Cable's classic performances ("Stalin to Mr Bean"), although Cable's efforts were done with the freedom of being acting leader with no expectations.

I did think, however, that he made two slight erros - nothing major, but worth noting.

Firstly he spoke from the middle of the front row of LibDem MPs, rather than in the traditional corner seat nearest the dispatch box and Speaker. Although this meant he was surrounded by frontbench colleagues cheering and nodding furiously, it did look rather like he was dodging battle and was avoiding facing down the Tory and Labour heckles. He looked safe in his new seat and well guarded but didn't look like he had the drive to be sitting in any other seat.

Also his choice of subject was a little bizarre. Some people have said that Cameron stole his topic (ID cards) and he was forced to use his emergency questions. I'm not too sure about this. I think he wanted some in-depth and worthy questions to mark a difference between himself and the jokey style of Vince. Is this the LibDems missing the big issue or trying to agenda set themselves?

What I did think was more clever was the use of other LibDem MP to ask supplementary questions on the same topic. Clegg has to survive with fewer shots at the PM than Cameron and usually LibDem MPs ask worthy questions regarding constituency issues. This method means Brown could come under more sustained scrutiny from the LibDems.

So overall a mixed bag. Clegg is new and untested. We'll have to wait and see!

Live Blogging PMQs

As this is probably the third most important PMQs Cameorn has faced (behind his first with Blair and then the first with Brown - both wins for Cameron) I thought I would live blog my views on how all sides do.

Brown flanked by Labour Deputy Leader Harman and Home Secretary Jacqui Smith - looks good for TV. They are wearing matching white suits!

Tory MP Phillip Davies raises the issue of the release of dangerous prisoners without tags. A strong political start. Brown hits back with support from various organisations. Brown says they were only allowed out 18 days early. Well, that's OK then! Jibe about the Tories not having enough money to pay for extra prison places.

Stroud MP David Drew raises the flood issues and says that it cannot take as long as it does to get mains water re-connected. Why should this sort of crisis mean that people should be without water for so long? Brown sends wishes to all those impacted by floods and praises those working to get the situation sorted. He looks a little shocked that it was his own MP that raised this. Brown is now reading a pre-scripted answer and failing to look sincere. He is, however, providing a very full answer. Brown says he is visiting the area today, taking Tory and Labour backbenchers with him.

Cameron rises to prolonged cheers from the Tory cheers. Cameron pays tributes to soldiers killed in Iraq. He then praises councils and emergency services in their work against the floods. Cameron says he wants to look to the future ... will the Environment Agency and councils now work together to reduce impact on critical services. Cameron looks consensual and Brown returns in kind. Brown lays out the focus of the inquiry into the flooding. Brown welcomes the stance of the Conservatives on this.

Cameron thanks Brown - Speaker stops Labour shouting down Cameron - he "names" a Labour MP for barracking. Cameron asks if councils will be forced to fund the first part of the flood repair bills because Brown has previously said that the insurance would cover 100%. Brown says that funding available will be 46million for just 2 counties. Brown not answering the question about percentages. Brown says flood defence spending has been increased.

Cameron asks what the government can do to make sure that insurance companies pay up speedily. Does the PM think that the hardship funds locally will be enough? Good questions from Cameron and he has come across well. Brown talks about crisis grants to help the uninsured. Brown says he wants to make sure people insure in future.

Rosemary McKenna, a Scottish Labour MP, asks what we can do to return confidence in broadcasters. Brown says he'll look into it.

Campbell, the LibDem Leader, rises to some cheers and pays tribute as Brown and Cameron have done. He says that he has seen the work on the ground - a jibe at Cameron. In the review set up, Campbell asks, will there be a detailed assessment of all impact on all critical services across the country and not just those in flooding areas? Infrastructure should be safe from flooding, and that includes all sites across the country says Brown. He offers Campbell the chance to look at the terms of reference.

Campbell now raises the Stern Report and the economic consequences of climate change. Will Brown spend the money to combat climate change? Brown says that he has increased spending on flood defences. He avoids Campbell's question.

Eric Illsley says that the smoking ban and high taxation is impacting on bingo clubs. Would Brown meet with him to discuss the issue? Brown says he will.

Graham Brady, the Tory MP who quit over grammar schools, raises to ironic cheers. He asks if Blair was right to give up £7bn Euro rebate? The Speaker tells off the Tories this time! Brown says the Tories don't support the enlargement of the EU ... a weak answer.

Dari Taylor asks about looked after children. Brown gives a strong answer and says he will meet to find a way forward.

Cameron leaps to his feet to raise the EU Constitution - to more ironic cheers! - and says that 90%-98% of the constitution is the same, according to the Irish and Spanish PMs. What % does the PM think is the same? Speaker Martin tells off Labour MPs again. Brown says Tories back on the old agenda. Brown lists objectives secured by the government and says Cameron should back the constitution. Brown quotes Ken Clarke saying the Tory position was absurd.

Cameron hits back by quoting Brown - who promised a vote and then backtracked. Cameron lists the good and the great who say that the constitution is the same. He presses him for the percentage that is the same. Brown continues to avoid the question, he falls back on a long-winded quote. Still no answer to Cameron's question. Tories getting restless.

Cameron asks why he doesn't wake up - and quotes the Trade Minister saying it is the same. Ah! say the Tories. Cameron says that if Brown wants to reintroduce trust into politics he will hold the vote. Brown says Cameron back to the old agenda - didn't take long after Ealing Southall by-election. Wheels are coming off the Tory bicycle ... lucky he has a car coming after him! Good joke, but Brown fails to answer the question again. Overall, a marginal win for Cameron but not his best performance.

Islington MP Emily Thornberry asks about the Royal Mail Strike. Brown says inflation is more important than wages.

LibDem MP Sir Robert Smith asks the PM to bring the British forces home from Basra and put them into Afghanistan. Brown says numbers are down and basically the answer is "no".

Mary Creagh, a Labour backbencher, asks about the need to change the law so that people are not scalded by hot water. Brown thanks her and says that she has done a great campaign. Guidance will be given to hot water installators. He will meet her.

Angus Robertson, SNP, says opinion polls puts Salmond ahead of Brown. Will he back Jack McConnell to be the Labour Leader? Yes, says Brown, and Labour have done well in Scotland. Hopes the SNP won't wreck the economy.

Lindsay Hoyle, Labour, asks if the government will back the new aircraft carrier building to support industry. Brown says yes.

David Heathcote-Amory, Conservative MP, asks what the PM will do to heal English and Scottish drift. Brown says 70% voted against independence ... throws it back to Cameron, does he support devolution?

Groans as Chris Bryant asks about child poverty - a good question, well put and those MPs who groaned must feel silly. Brown gives a list of statistics to show how Labour are making things better. Yawn. Nothing about the future here.

Cameron's First Question

Brown's First PMQs:
Rt. Hon. David Cameron MP (Con, Witney): "Does the Prime Minister agree with his new Party Chairman and Party Deputy Leader when she says that if she knew then what she knew now, she wouldn't vote voted for the war?"

Or maybe he'll go for Trident, or tax, or any one of the other desperate gaffes she used to win in the first place!

As somebody once said, "I'm enjoying this..!"

Cameron does it again!

Tory Leader David Cameron and his aides must have thought long and hard before launching his call for Blair to resign. It is true that the excellent soundbites at PMQs this week got Cameron some of his best headlines since being elected over a year ago. It put the Blair succession issue back on the media agenda and compounded another bad week for the Premier.

But I cannot help thinking that this wasn't just some short-term headline grabbing initiative. Cameron toured the media handing out the same "hello, just go" line for a few days and the Sunday Express poll today picked up the same theme (53% want Blair gone now, including 43% of Labour voters.)

So is there a longer-term strategy in place? The more I think about this, the more I think there is. When Dave was elected I said that his real USP was being able to "out-think" Labour on a number of issues. I feel he's done it again.

Blair is the Tories best asset. We want him to stay in place long enough for his to lead his party to one last (and maybe the greatest) slaughtering at the polls this May. We want meltdown in England, a battering in Scotland and a thumping in Wales. We want Blair to be the man who leads Labour into the oncoming electoral machine gun fire and watch as Labour Councils and Councillors are defeated.

So when then demand he quit? Because the one thing he now cannot do is resign - because we've told him to. If Blair quits now, Cameron will claim the scalp and will be the Tory Leader who finally got rid of Blair. The Tory media will declare that the Witney MP will have been instrumental in ousting the Sedgefield MP. Hence Blair cannot quit now and give Cameron that boost. He must hang on and go in his own time and in his own way. And in the time being, lead Labour to that May defeat.

Win-Win for the Conservative Leader.