« Backbench power 1, Freedom of association 0 | Main | MPs reinstate "glorification of terror" measure »

Comments

"Best behaved person of the day: Labour benches were quiet."

Apart from referring to Sir Menzies Campbell as 'baldy' and 'the elderly toff opposite' obviously...

Ming should never try a joke again - the timing was awful and the silence which followed was painful!

"Ming should never try a joke again - the timing was awful and the silence which followed was painful!"

It was the same when he tried making a joke about Andrew Flintoff having the 'safest pair of hands' on the Question Time Liberal Deoprat leadership snoreathon last week.

*Demoprat, not Deoprat!

You're 100% right Michael. Ming's Gordon Brown joke bombed. A bad day for his leadership chances. I felt sorry for him. He looked old and vulnerable, frankly.

Did Blair actually rule out referendums on local government reorganisation? His joke about Prescott's remarks being "very very clear" was good and can be read as an endorsement of Prescott's position - all we have to do now is work out what Prescott meant...

Blair was poor against Hague. He got onto his hissy fit high horse again. His "anger" always sounds a bit forced, and it did again today.

What a creep Andrew Neil is. On The Daily Politics he referred to the Tory leader as David "call me Dave" Cameron. Does he or anybody else have any evidence that Cameron has ever said that?

John,

I bow to no one in my admiration of DC, but can you doubt that the man who exalted listeners to 'keep it real' also asks to be called 'Dave'??

What was the Campbell "joke"?

"What a creep Andrew Neil is. On The Daily Politics he referred to the Tory leader as David "call me Dave" Cameron. Does he or anybody else have any evidence that Cameron has ever said that?"

Richard Littlejohn also refers to him by this title. Where has this "joke" emanated from?

"Richard Littlejohn also refers to him by this title. Where has this "joke" emanated from?"

Since his stomach-turning introduction as 'Dave' by Gideon 'call me George' Osborne at his leadership campaign launch.


Sorry to go "off message" but is anybody going to the the Jo ann Nadler event tonight?

Should be good.

Just following a lateral thought from another thread. Does anyone think there is a case for reform of PMQ's to make it a more meaningful political exchange? It seems to have descended into a bit of 'knock about' which nobody takes particularly seriously. Suggestions might be:

1) Ban the PM from attacking or caricaturing opposition policies

2) Stop obviously planted questions on the government side

Also, the leader of the opposition should speak 'on behalf of the public' in his efforts to keep an overly strong 'executive' to account.

Any thoughts?

Does anyone think there is a case for reform of PMQ's to make it a more meaningful political exchange?
Not me. A "meaningful political exchange" sounds absolutely stomach-churning.

It seems to have descended into a bit of 'knock about' which nobody takes particularly seriously
On the contrary, I think the Westminster Village takes it very seriously. If it was irrelevant, the Blairsheviks wouldn't go to such great lengths to plant questions. And if 'dour Brown' is damaging for Labour, a weekly display of it is all to the good. I think it reflects a peculiarly British approach to things, and I'd prefer to keep it as it is.

Ban the PM from attacking or caricaturing opposition policies
Actually, he already is. Speaker Martin has been rather robust at calling Blair to account over this.

Stop obviously planted questions on the government side
Impossible. And if a Govmt minister wants to say something, they'll twist the question anyway. Better leaving it crass and obvious as it is: it lets the Labour benches know which of their numbers are toadying to Blair.

'Speaker Martin has been rather robust at calling Blair to account for this'.I trust you are joking William,although he was pulled up for this recently he gets away with it every week.
I wonder if a tactic that might work would be for Cameron to adopt the 'Paxman' approach and if he's not satisfied that Blair has answered the question just ask the same question again and again until Blair answers it.
On another topic the BBC website always has a verdict section on PMQs written by Nick Assinder.I'm starting to think that even by the BBCs standards this is biased.According to Nick Blair discomfited the Tories by calling them weak and Ming did well!Yeah right.

Yes I'm not sure what Nick Assinder is on at the moment. Seems to be viewing something completely different to the rest of us.

Ah, Nick Assinder. The man who seemed far too eager to write off Cameron last week, even (I'm paraphrasing here) suggesting that to call Cameron's performace a "flop" was too kind! OK, it wasn't good, but, by hell, who needs the Labour spin machine to do all the dirty work when they've got the BBC doing it for them!

And, of course, this week, even though Blair was knocked around the Commons, we get a much more balanced view from Assinder. I don't think I'll bother reading his verdicts anymore.

Don't not read him Elena,complain!Eventually perhaps if enough people do that Assinder might think twice before he gives into his prejudices.

MTK: The 'Campbell joke' was to ask Tony Blair to welcome the new LibDem MP for Dunfermline and as he had Gordon Brown as a constituent to ask the PM if he had any advice on how to get on with him.

Yes Assinder has made a complete Assinder of himself with his latest review. I see the concerted BBC 'Campbell for leader' campaign goes unabated.

Here is a copy of the e-mail I sent to Nick Assinder. Hope he replies.

"I know the Beeb is a leftist institution, but can't you pretend to be a bit more objective in your PMQ sketches (you have to justify the BBC's compulsory license fee somehow). I know you like it when Tory spokesmen underperform, but to over exagerate bad performances makes it look as if we watch different versions of PMQs from what you do.

Besides, you and all the other political commentators always judge the politicians' performances at PMQs and parliamentary debates on how successful they are in spinning the answers, sidestepping controversy or putting down opponents, rather than how accountable and truthful they are in answering the questions.

Blair is always rated very well by the commentariat, but he doesn't actually answer the questions put to him. PMQs is just one huge spin operation which you and the rest of the political commentariat don't mind because you love the entertainment of 'Punch and Judy' politics. No wonder the public has lost faith in politics. Spin is rated higher than honesty. Cheers"

DVA:Yes Assinder has made a complete Assinder of himself with his latest review. I see the concerted BBC 'Campbell for leader' campaign goes unabated.

Never interrupt an enemy while he's making a mistake. A "balding Scotch toff" as Lib Dem leader would be useful for us. A preview of forthcoming attractions:

* Unity is strength: Clegg vs Huhne vs Laws leaking against each other in a catfight for the succession

* Our toff is better than their toff: does any one seriously doubt that DC will scramble Ming the Motionless?

* Cry God for Harry, England and St George: both enemies led by Scotchmen

* Tick tock tick tock: Political Betting running a book on poor old Ming's health

It's almost enough to make you join them in order to vote for him....

"It was the same when he tried making a joke about Andrew Flintoff having the 'safest pair of hands' on the Question Time Liberal Deoprat leadership snoreathon last week." - Daniel Vince-Archer

That was particularly cringeworthy!

Good to see the Labour backbench class warriors were out in force again today. I can't wait to kick them out the commons at the next election.

I'm really optimistic about seeing off the threat of the new Lib Dem leader. I mean, look at the candidates;

Ming Campbell: - Scarily senile
Chris Huhne: - Scarily boring
Simon Hughes: - Just plain scary

Is this the best the Libs could come up with? I mean, I would have had a little more respect for them if they'd dumped their last (failed) leader with a clear alternative - but looking at this shower, I guess not...

It is a fallacy to imagine that what constitutes a good leader is someone who is attractive to oneself. Even if a Conservative may find Simon Hughes "scary", he does nonetheless represent well the views of the average Liberal Democrat supporter.

Hughes does suffer from being unpopular among fellow MPs, and he has a slightly tarnished reputation after his outing; but even this does not seem to be enough to suggest that he would be an unsuccesful leader.

Since no-one votes Lib Dem thinking that they will form a government, the Lib Dems don't have to worry about formulating realistic policies. Their *best* card is taking the moral high ground; and this to some extent means being a bit crazy and anti-establishment.

I actually didn't think Hague was very effective.

Even if a Conservative may find Simon Hughes "scary", he does nonetheless represent well the views of the average Liberal Democrat supporter.

Change "supporter" to "Member" and I would agree with you. They are all a bunch of raving lefties. Their voters are not however.

Hughes is a bad choice if they wish to continue to pretend to be all things to all men. He is simply too left wing. Which is why I wanted him to win.

"Never interrupt an enemy while he's making a mistake. A "balding Scotch toff" as Lib Dem leader would be useful for us."

I think the neosocialist Simon Hughes would actually be more useful, for a variety of reasons:

- the Liberal Demoprats would lose the scant credibility they have in the media;
- the Liberal Demoprats would lurch to the left, and siphon off votes from Labour;
- metropolitan voters would become alienated, leaving their votes up for grabs;
- Gordon Brown would be left with the quandary of deciding whether to shift to the left to head off the Liberal Demoprats, allowing us to move in on the centre ground OR to stand firm in the centre ground in order to try and woo disaffected moderate Liberal Demoprat voters and take the fight to Cameron's Conservatives™, leaving Labour's left flank exposed to Simon Hughes's rabble;
- the Liberal Demoprats would be wracked by internal divisions, and would suffer either defections or incessant plotting from day 1.

Nick Assinder is referred to by Private Eye as Nick Asslicker. Never thought much of him myself, which is presumably why he's online correspondent and hasn't progressed to the TV.

Agree with DVA - for the sake of winning back the southern Tory/LD marginals, we should hope Hughes wins. Can't see Eastleigh swallowing his medicine (or that of their own MP for that matter!).

Sorry, not that I mean to impune online journalists - hopefully you see what I mean!

I would agree with that DVA.Ming is not a great parliamentary performer but so what? He does come across (to me at least)as both plausible and eminently decent.As a Conservative I would prefer either Huhne (boring Eurofanatic) or Hughes (a bit odd,leftwing and a liar).

Interesting hatchet job on Chris Huhne in the Times today, which could be interpreted as pretty much implying that he's economically reckless and a drug-pusher.

As with our own leadership contest, it would appear that the BBC and the rest of the metropolitan media have decided who they want as leader (Menzies Campbell in this case) and will stop at nothing to get their way.

When I said "never interrupt the enemy when he's making a mistake", the enemy I actually meant was the BBC, but the point holds good for the Lib Dems as a whole.

Don't waste time picking the most-odd Lib Dem: they're Lib Dems; they're all odd.

Ming the Mirthless could become the Liberal IDS - decent, well-meaning, but despised by the media and undermined by his colleagues' in-fighting. True, Hughes has great potential as an object of derision, but the activists will rally behind him. More worryingly, there is a chance he would unite the rest of the MPs in a putsch to oust him. Better to have him lose, and have the Beardies fretting that their man was "cheated" of his rightful inheritance, while the Orange Bookers are fighting themselves as to who succeeds Ming.

What we want out of this is 4 yrs of Lib Dem conferences passing resolutions in favour of foaming idiocy + an ineffectual Lib Dem leadership + no chance for them to snap out of it before the election. Ming scores on all three.

Blimey William!And I thought I was a cynic!

"Ming the Mirthless could become the Liberal IDS - decent, well-meaning, but despised by the media and undermined by his colleagues' in-fighting."

I'm not sure he would be despised by the media - he's clearly their 'chosen one' in this contest - but I agree that he would be undermined by the starting gun being fired for the next leadership contest on day 1 of a Campbell leadership.

Coming back to the media point - I normally have no truck with the usual whinging about 'BBC bias' but their efforts on behalf of Campbell in this contest take my breath away - from the assistance with maintaining his profile (he was wheeled out yesterday to discuss the 'glorification' law, although given the resignation of Mark Oaten, I'm not sure who should represent them on Home Affairs) to the constant subliminal pushing of Campbell as the de facto front-runner.

"True, Hughes has great potential as an object of derision, but the activists will rally behind him."

Activists, yes. Moderates, no. Better to have Hughes and Brown contesting the votes of the sandal-wearers rather than having three leaders with centrist credibility fighting over those votes.

We will have nothing to fear from the Lib/Dems if Ming Campbell is leader at the next election. Up against David Cameron he will simply look like an old man who as his day.
If Simon Hughes becomes leader he will take them so far to the left they will become a laughing stock.
Personally I think the biggest hreat to the party winning the next election isn`t our opponents but ourselves. We must make sure we stay united, back the leadership and realise all the time, day in, day out that unity and loyalty is the way to victory.

I don't quite remember you saying the same when Michael Howard was leader Jack.But I do agree with you in the sense that the leadership contest is over and that the endless sniping at the leadership that we sometimes see benefits noone more than our enemies.

Malcolm:I don't quite remember you saying the same when Michael Howard was leader Jack

Jack is clearly maturing. He's moved on from advocating zero-policies to demanding zero-dissent.

"We must make sure we stay united, back the leadership and realise all the time, day in, day out that unity and loyalty is the way to victory."

Quite right. Dissent must not be tolerated, comrade.

The BBC's love of Ming goes back a long way.
He was on Newsnight for day after day pontificating about Iraq while the real shadow foreign secretary Michael Ancram was invisible.

And certainly the best way to raise Ancram's blood pressure of an evening was to tell him the Today prog were taking Ming an not him.

The comments to this entry are closed.

#####here####

Categories

ConHome on Twitter

    follow me on Twitter

    Conservative blogs

    Today's public spending saving

    New on other blogs

    • Receive our daily email
      Enter your details below:
      Name:
      Email:
      Subscribe    
      Unsubscribe 

    • Tracker 2
    • Extreme Tracker