« Four economists review the TRC report | Main | Authenticity and breadth »


I expect Cameron will ask about security and it might be quite a serious exchange between the two leaders.

Expect the rottweiler questions from backbenchers.

Why wait for the clash - surely all the Cam haters, trolls and ostriches can slam his performance now ?

too true JimJam.

What not another USA sponsored attack on our party? $$$$$$$$$$$$

Cameron would do well to open a front on the economy and the problems that have been stored up under Brown's time at the Treasury. Too many people are unaware of the scale of the problems that are coming home to roost.

I see anyone who dares to question the leadership is now labelled as a Cam hater, troll or ostrich. I am so relieved there are enlightened people who seek to reassure people with any concerns about leadership performance that those concerns may have some validity. This paragraph may contain traces of irony.

Agree with JimJam, just let the usual whingers loose with some more entirely predictable bile.


Cllr Sharp,

My point is that as was shown yesterday when Cameron did very well he was still slated on this sight - he'd have to win the GE with a 300 majority by 12.30 pm to keep a sizeable majority on here happy.

Just watched a piece on the Daily Politics. What odds on GB getting the word prudent in somewhere!

Doesnt Quentin look right at home on the Labour benches.

Only a 300 majority Jimjam? You jest surely! It should be at least 400 and we should be more far more than 100% ahead in the polls. It would all be so easy if we followed the advice of people like Traditional Tory or Stephen Tolkinghome

Appalling answer by Brown - saying he's been in post for 5 days!!!

On Hizb ut-Tahrir GB: "I've been here five days (leave me alone)"

Surely Brown can do better than that?

Looks like any thoughts of Brown Scrapping ID Cards can be quashed.

And he keeps saying "When I was Chancellor" or during his time at the Treasury. People want a Prime Minister not a former Chancellor!

Ughh and the speaker can't even keep up with who is asking questions now!

So GB is all for cooperation on security ... as long as DC goes along with Brown's policies.

When he was a chancellor he wrecked our pensions,


Cameron really got to Brown. "I've only been in this job 5 days" -- are you kidding me? I don't buy that PMQs makes a significant difference electorally, but if it does, this has to be a very good day for David Cameron.

As I said yesterday neil, this is a man who believes in only one consensus. His!!

Ming cracks a joke. Wonders never cease.

Brown blows it! The pathetic 'i've only been in the job for 5 days' will come back to haunt. He comes across as too sholarly hence dull. DC actually performed very well! YAY!!! About time too. Cameron 8 out of 10, Brown 5 out of ten. As to DC's last question, is the Speaker trying to torpedo DC's momentum? Brown was struggling up to that point.

EdR - I agree. It really does show you what Labour will miss now Blair has gone. I always thought he performed well at PMQs. To say that he's only been in the job 5 days is frankly pathetic. he's been after the job for a decade or more.

Would it be fair to say he ended up agreeing to Cameron's demands?

Campbell gave a great answer to the "door is always open" from Brown.... "more of a trap door" (laughter)

Yep, DC's got this one in the bag.

Job done, for this week.

John Reid on the floor now...!

The speaker is awful!

...coming to Brown's rescue. oh ha ha ha

Rob Wilson has him on the run now. Bad day for Brown this is.

If this is our Prime Minister, god help us all. "But but but but but"

bu bu but ...ca ca ca can I i I telll, ca can I tell the Rt Hon Gentleman...

Awful... Brilliant!

How fascinating >yawn< .

I think you'll find the less obsessive among us have been working rather than watching non-events on the idiot box.

He certainly doesn't seem to like it when the opposition benches get a bit rowdy. It certainly seems to put him off his stride. If I was writing Brown's report for his first PMQ's it would be - Could do better!

Very weak performance from Brown, and if anything the attempt by the former home secretary John Reid to come to his rescue makes him look even weaker. The give me a chance i've only been PM for 5 days plea has to be one of the most pathetic replies any Prime minister has given to a leader of the opposition.

Not really a subject for DC to get his teeth into, given that national security is a shared concern (albeit with differences on detail rather than primary aim).

I look forward to future PMQs on topics where there are philosophical differences between parties. Perhaps DC will consistently be shown to be lighter on his feet in debate than GB.

Yes, very lame for GB to hide behind only having been 5 days in post. Jacqui Smith managed creditably with regard to the terrorist attempts, without bleating similarly, when chucked in the deep end upon being appointed Home Secretary.

To James Gray, 'I think he would agree with me that the Defence Secretary is doing an excellent job'

I doubt you could get anyone other than members of the Labour Party and Des Browne's family and friends who would agree with that statement. It really does show that the man can't accept reality.

JimJam, I understand and accept your point. I largely feel the same way, that there are too many people who go out of their way to find fault with the leadership.

But I do feel it is important that when any valid concerns are raised they are not lumped in with those contributors you were referring to. That was the reason for my comment. I would like to see much more reasoned objectivity on this site from contributors and less faux fury.

Well done DC. Brown was all over the place, stammering etc. His isolationist policies such as not turning up to security briefings were exposed.

So Traditional Tory you are so busy not watching but yet you still find time to comment on here. Fascinating . . .

DC should have stayed away from security - no political gain in going on about an issue which is not really partisan. Should have gone after him on pensions and the damage Brown has personally done.

Thanks chaps. It's been good reading your comments as the event too place.

I must say the response from the PM concerning the Alastair Darling quote was shambolic. There is nothing about ID cards that makes them any more relevant today than when Darling made his comments. Good, statesmanlike performance by Cameron today. He was well prepared.

For the PM to consider that public pronouncements by Hizb-ut Tahrir do not constitute evidence and therefore no action from the government needs to be taken; but that all people should be roped into the ID card and database state because of the actions such pronouncements inspire, shows the warped mentality of this Labour administration. The assault on privacy continues under the new Stalin.

Apart from the Conservatives Every voice i heard in the 'Hoose' was Scottish, still, i suppose thats appropriate, it is the Scottish parliament South after all!.

Brown is a gibbering buffoon, an amateurish clown.

Andrew. My stepson is a serving army officer who is being deployed to Afghanistan later this year. I asked him about the army's general view on Browne and he said that we was actually relatively well respected unlike some of his predecessors of both political persuasions.

I think his dual role is wholly wrong, vut we should not be blinkered to public reality just because the person wears a different coloured rosette.

PMQs this afternoon provided an interesting insight into Gordon Brown’s character. Stumbling over his over his words and looking increasingly haggard and desperate, you’d be forgiven for thinking that this was a PM fighting for his political life than a leader fresh from unanimous election (speaking of which, it’s been a long time since Ming has come across more impressively than another party leader). Cameron put the PM under pressure again and again to justify the disgraceful two-year delay in banning extremist hate groups.

Brown just doesn’t have Blair’s levels of confidence, humour and charisma – all vital ingredients to survive in the pressure-cooker atmosphere of Prime Ministers Questions.

Perhaps Gordon should start wearing one of those “WWTD” bracelets to keep him in the right frame of mind in such situations.

“What Would Tony Do?”

Editor judging by the consensus in the comments today it was a bit more than a "narrow" win for DC!

I missed it so looking forward to the replay on Sky active

there are too many people who go out of their way to find fault with the leadership.

People find fault with the leadership because there is plenty of fault to find.

Like most normal people I am working, albeit from home, but I caught the last few minutes of this, and the discussion.

Michael Heseltine, hardly a rabid right-winger, just said 'I think Cameron won on points narrowly' so I think we'll give greater weight to his opinion than to the overheated twitterings of the usual suspects.

I see that some boffin's analysis of the audience panel's approval ratings shows 'promise there for Mr Brown, but there's still some work to do'

Well done David Cameron - it appears we have the first signs of genuine opposition.

Gordon Brown failed to provide a single answer to any questions and was on the defensive throughout. His attitude to Hizb ut-Tahrir was shameful. He seems instead content to fund multi-faith organisations instead of doing something real about our security. His answer to everything is ID cards - which when you consider this government's record on IT projects is a recipe for disaster - we might as well hand all our intimate details to the terrorists on a plate.

Gordon's response on the acceptability of EDS' 106 year repayment schedule is equally atrocious. When was the last time any of us got a deal like that? Certainly not from the tax man. His comment that this was a standard commercial transaction was also laughable. I would have given my eye-teeth in business to have terms like that.

Gordon's final excuse will come to haunt him. Only 5 days in the job - pull the other one Gordon, you've been the second string in the country for 10 years!

Way to go DC. Gordon's so weak he needs John Reid to come to his defence! Keep on the facts - the con man is unable to answer.

Haven't seen it yet. Did the Fist Fail to Clunk then?

Would prefer if all commentators stopped referring to PMQs as a blood sport. I saw some Labour guy quoted the other day saying Brown would "kill" Cameron, and CH used a "Cameron draws blood" headline recently. DC and the Clunky Fister are engaged in oratory for the purpose of maximising their electoral support. No-one dies and it feels to me (no doubt I'm wrong, or at least unpopular, I am usually at least one of the two) unnecessarily unpleasant to use the imagery of death.

Well done Watevole. I wonder how many people outside CCHQ can spell Hizb ut-Tahrir as well as you can?

Like the editor said, a narrow win for DC. Nothing to get an orgasm about

Very impressed by Cameron today.

He spoke easily and well and raised an interesting issue about that extremist group, whereas Brown often stuttered and his response, "I've only been in the job five days" seriously backfired.

The Labour benches were rather muted and Brown was heckled throughout. He just can't hold an audience on the palm of his hand like Blair could.

John Reid answering his defense questions for him was 'help' he probably did not need!

Cameron's relaxed yet serious opposition compared to Brown's hesitant, mechanical responses reminded me of that quote about Cameron being a man of the "digital age" and Brown being stuck in the past.

I think Graeme Archer has a point. I hadn't thought about it before, but the headline on the Sky News website is "Cameron fails to draw Brown blood." Apart from the fact that I think he did, in a metaphorical sense, it's not the most edifying way of putting it.

In fairness, I'd say it was a narrow win for Sir Menzies Campbell if anyone.

Gordon Brown versus David Cameron was more a case of 'match postponed', rather than a score-draw or win for either man.

Having said that, Brown's bleating about only being in the job for 5 days was pathetic, especially as he's been preparing for the job for years now.


"the Clunky Fister"

Now thats an image I didn't need.

Cameron's relaxed yet serious opposition compared to Brown's hesitant, mechanical responses reminded me of that quote about Cameron being a man of the "digital age" and Brown being stuck in the past.

What you mean stuck in the past like Pericles, Cicero, Chatham, Lincoln, Churchill?

Don't be ridiculous.

it feels to me (no doubt I'm wrong, or at least unpopular, I am usually at least one of the two) unnecessarily unpleasant to use the imagery of death.

Quite right Graeme Archer, and why apologise? I grew out of this unpleasant Ramboesque approach to politics at about age 21.

Strange how it remains the preserve of those who claim they are committed to a fluffier more tree-hugging version of Conservatism.

I'm watching the replay. Cameron definitely won - and not narrowly. Clearly Nick Robinson thought it went very badly for Brown. Talk on the BBC daily politics of a sharp intake of breath in the press gallery for his clanger. Political Betting, Iain Dale commenters, everybody scoring clear win for Cameron. Rather nice to see poor Ming enjoying himself.

In fairness, I'd say it was a narrow win for Sir Menzies Campbell if anyone.

You'd better go and argue the toss with Iain Dale, DVA. He seems to be taking a slightly different view of events!

Trad T

I must confess to still being very intrigued by your 'Traditional' suffix...were you of the same mind under the more 'traditional' Hague, IDS, and Howard?

Gosh, didn't this thread start off with some very, very defensive, anxious 'Roon whinging? And that even before kick off - nervous girls? Not half it would seem. For what little it's worth, I think Cameron did a good job*, being a bit better than he normally is, and that Brown was clearly nervous as hell, and so did worse than he usually does. However, I think the consensus here ('Cameron was "robbed" of a chance to really score because he has to be respectful on security issues') is entirely wrong. In fact, by taking partisan rough and tumble out of the contest, a war dead/terrorism alert/etc PMQ raises the leader of the opposition to the same dignified level as the PM. Hague lacked precisely this sort of ideal moment to establish himself against Blair, and was seen as a lightweight thereafter as a result. Whereas IDS was artifically flattered by having to talk so much about 11th September when he took over, thus disguising his manifold weaknesses on actual domestic political issues.

Hard hearted as it is to think like this, Cameron is yet again showing himself to be a lucky politician, in terms of the first context where he has had to establish himself against Brown-as-PM. Ask yourself, which sort of PMQ would Cameron honestly have benefitted from more - one where Brown has to piously deal with deadly serious stuff like terrorism in a 'straight' let's-all-seek-national-consensus manner, or, one where 'normal' politics prevailed, and thus Brown was e.g. taking lumps out of Cameron over defections, grammar schools, absurdities like Boris for mayor, &c? Historically PMQs has *always* been a bigger deal for the leader of the opposition than the PM (in that the former has more to lose, though little to gain) because PMQs is essentially all we have to judge opposition leaders on, whereas we can judge Prime Ministers against the way they actually run the country. So I repeat: terrorism's bad news for the rest of us, but it's a lucky break for Cameron as far as PMQs are concerned.

Real world elections aren't decided on the 'respectable' issues, like terrorism and the cross-party consensus that invites, where people strive *not* to point score. Elections, and party standing, are decided on exactly the issues - hospitals, schools, the economy, welfare, crime, immigration - where politicians *do* point score. So it's only when we get to a run of PMQs dominated by those issues that we'll truly see who has the edge.

*Though Cameron's as wrong as wrong can be on banning Hizb ut-Tahrir - I'll say no more than this, but they're, in their current form, as useful a honeytrap as Hookie was in Finsbury Park. Let's all of us just reflect on the fact that the security services *don't* want HuT banned, and they are cynically right on that front.

Sorry, that should be prefix...oops!

Mike Smithson at Political Betting makes an interesting observation about the plea from the man who ran the British economy for ten years that he's only been Prime Minister for five days.

He's actually been Prime Minister for seven days. D'oh!

(Fiddling the figures is obviously an old habit that will die hard for Gordon Brown.)

Well I think some of the coverage has been a little generous to Gordon Brown, perhaps he was cut a bit of slack as it was his first PMQs.

The key point was that Brown didn't have an answer to David Cameron and whilst I do think John Reid was trying to help rather than seeking to embarrass the Prime Minister it really just highlighted how little Gordon Brown knew about the subject.

Gordon's biggest mistake when he didn't have an answer to David Cameron was to use the defence that he'd only been in the job a few days, the fact is that isn't an excuse , he wanted the job and of course has been in the government for 10 years.

David Cameron did well, good questions, spoke with confidence and was able to expose the weaknesses of a prime minister whose own performance was nervous and one for which he did not seem well prepared.

Needless to say, Nick Assinder described the encounter as evenly-matched.

I think Brown will struggle with the vast brief compared to the Treasury. He like control over the detail. He will be very uncomfortable in the PM role. Today is just the start. Once his Govt. have a full program, we can start launching attacks from all angles. Thats if we have time to spare after critisising the Conservative leader non-stop on CH.

A points win for Cameron and no mistake.
However this is day one, it was nice to see Mr Cameron resort to his usual Punch and Judy antics which is a turn off to most people.
Nice to see the leader of the opposition win at the trick questions, it done Mr Hague a lot of good also, he too won on a regular basis.
Mr Brown done his level best to rise above "Punch and Judy" and appear statesmanlike, he remained his usual solid style, and, allowing for the fact that he has had a baptism of fire in his first 5 days. Plus the floods and also bearing in mind all Mr Cameron has had to do is find 6 obscure questions to try and baffle Mr Brown.
Results Mr Brown did not have and answer and definately failed in second guessing Mr Brain of Britain Cameron.
What he did have an answer for though was the Terrorist threat, the floods and every other subject that people find important.
Now I am sure quite a lot of people will not be able to sleep tonight because Mr Cameron has asked Mr Brown a question that he could not answer. I bet it is the talk of our local all night.
Mr Brown should have it slapped over his CV...failure due to the fact that nobody had told him the question Mr Cameron asked had been looked into but not enough evidence was found to bring forward a successful prosecution.
Oh dear, I am sure this is going to cost Mr Brown the next election.

This constant theme of 'stop dissing Dave' that the same people keep squeaking and squeaking again - is this a benediction exclusive to Dave-as-leader, or did it equally apply to all our leaders past? I only ak because round Dave, obviously, there are quite a few people conspicuous for their starred firsts when it comes to slagging off former Tory leaders. Yet more 'Roon' Don't Do As We Did form?

Spot on Graham Sheppard,, Quentin Davies,s ugly, stupid face looks at home amongst the rest of the ugly people. Its hard not to feel revolted when you see them in the televised Commons. They make the Creatures from the Black Lagoon look more appealing and intelligent.
M Hesltine was right on the Daily Politics when he described Brown as a giant in a cabinet of pygmies
DC put up a good show today against (I,ve only been in the job 5 days) Brown.
DC should keep plugging away about the need for a Referendum on Europe and the West Lothian question, because sooner or later you English voters are going to tire of being spit roasted, with Euro enthusiasts screwing you at one end and the Labour Scots screwing you at the other.

Well DVA, If Nick Assinder scored it as a draw DC must have knocked him out!
'I grew out of this unpleasant approach to... politics when I was aged 21'-Trad Tory. Really?

Mr. Brown's performance today at PMQ's was a good example of the fact that you may crave a position for ten years AND think that its yours by right, BUT that does not necessarily mean that you have any idea at all of what is really involved in the job! Micale Foot was another example of that.

Perhaps Mr. Brown will ['disappear') for a week or so now, and take an intensive course in public debating!

It may take the general public a bit longer to become aware of the significance of the clunking fist that is now their 'leader', but on today's showing it won't be too long!

He cannot go for Brown's jugular in the way he would if we did not have the security scares.
If there is something that needs changing to tighten security, in fact anything that is wrong then it is in the national interest for him to push for changes on that issue. He can still say that he will do his utmost for the War on Terror, indeed he can emphasise that his criticisms are intended to help get neccessary action rather than merely for the purpose of points scoring.

The Intelligence Services and Police and other security organisations will go on functioning on a day to day basis as arguments go on about current ways of dealing with the crisis and what can be done in the future.

Clunking Fister

Graeme, thank you! I hope that one makes it out of the blogosphere and into common usage.

Joseph = Jack?

"In the job for 5 days"

I was sure he took over last Wednesday which is 7 days - being Prime Minister is not a Monday to Friday job

Unfortunately holding the Executive to account becomes Punch & JUdy for our national comic


Unfortunately holding the Executive to account becomes Punch & JUdy for our national comic


Missed it all but I think it's wonderful that Brown's "only in the job 5 days" line is 40% out!! I suppose he's implying he took the week-end off (very work/life balance).

Needless to say, Nick Assinder described the encounter as evenly-matched.

That's the BBC we love, Daniel.

ConservativeHome should sponsor Nick Assinder to go on a “refresher” course in balanced journalism. Perhaps we should also buy him a dictionary, and then he can look up the difference between “threatened” and “promised”.

"The closest he got was to demand an immediate ban on an extremist Muslim group, Hizb ut Tahrir, which the government had threatened to outlaw two years ago." -- Nick Assinder, BBC

So, according to Nick, when Tony Blair said "Nine, we will proscribe Hizb-ut-Tahira... it was a threat, not a promise. It leaves me wondering whether Nick’s got a bad memory, or whether he’s spinning the story slightly?

Sorry, that was my Anon.

Thanks Tim for the very fair update at the top of the main post!

Well Patsy, it was probably because he was so unprepared for PMQ's after all he has been frittering his time away during the last five days, with first his visit to the Palace, then being in touch with world leaders, then there was the trivial matter of the terrorist outrages, not to mention a full cabinet reshuffle, COBRA meetings, Intelligence briefings, attending parliament for the Home Office statement, plus a Constitutional Statement Q and A session regarding the Constitution all of which prepares itself "Just like that"
The fact that umpteen red boxes also has to be dealt with on a daily basis does not matter so he must not waste valuable time on them
He was prepared for the remainder of the questions put to him. Still as you say he really does not know what the job involves.
I would suggest he gets off his lazy butt for next weeks PMQ's and then be better prepared, after all Mr Cameron has broken a sweat trying to find the life and death questions with all of his team.
It is an outrage that the PM cannot answer them.
Shame nobody told Mr Brown that it is part of his new job description to know all the answers to obscure questions and to second guess the leader of the oppositions questions. I am sure you will agree with me on those points.
He really must make better use of the time between dusk and dawn.
The lazy good for nothing so-in-so he ought to step down and give the job to someone who can get it done.

Cameron's first question next week should be:

"Now that the PM has been in post for a full 12 days, I wonder if he would mind me asking a question on....(education/health/terror/whatever)?"

Cameron lost an opportunity today to annihilate Brown for that 5 days comment. He had the chance to make Brown look like a scolded child and failed to take it. Very disappointing.

Joseph protests too, too much - Brown under-performed, Cameron had an up day, and the terrain was good for the leader of the opposition. I said yesterday that the more maniac cries by diehard 'Roons about Cameron's performance wouldn't be borne out in this morning's newspapers, and they weren't. Tomorrow some papers are certainly going to go overboard on the whole 'I've only been PM for 5 days' moan, but it's like the cliche about budgets: beware the first consensus, it's generally wrong . . . Cameron vs Brown at PMQs is a fight that's going to be settled on contentious everyday politics, not on this 'all good men agree' security stuff, which is atypical (thank God) and politically meaningless (they both, at root, agree).

Just watched Brown's first PMQ's on C-SPAN in the US.

No doubt the overall winners were Cameron and to a lesser extent Campbell. Brown was atrocious as epitmoised by his comment he had only been in power for 5 days - my maths might be bad but I thought it was 10 years 5 days.

His reply to Anne M from the Vale of York was an insult to all those people who got flooded - he wasted 5 billion on his tax credit scheme but could not find sufficient funding to build adequate flood defences.

Assinder on the BBC seemed to have been watching a different PMQ's - obviously a Brown fan.

Bring on next week - Cameron to destroy Brown again.

PS Again the Speaker was awful - time he went!

There is debate over how much resonance the weekly session has outside of political circles.

Philip Cowley, a professor of political science at the University of Nottingham, thinks it is negligible.

"The political classes get very excited by the prime minister's weekly joust with his opposite number, but it's worth remembering that the public as a whole are much less concerned, and it has relatively little effect on a party's standing in the polls," he said.

Blair, for example, was regularly judged to have been defeated by former Tory leader William Hague — yet Hague was trounced in the 2001 general election.

"Even Margaret Thatcher was routinely beaten at question time," Cowley said, "and it didn't stop her going on to be the longest-serving British prime minister of the 20th century."

Act, I agree with you about Browns performance.
However I wonder how well your own man would have done under the same circumstances?

Quite truthfully and sarcasm apart I am glad this happened to Brown of his debut. If I was a betting man I would put good money on that we do not see a repeat of it.
Remeber the old adage he who laughs last......

The political classes get very excited by the prime minister's weekly joust with his opposite number

This is absolutely true. And supporters of the opposition side even more so.

In Roy Hattersley's memoirs he describes an occasion where he had to stand in for Kinnock, who was ill, at PMQs against Mrs Thatcher. He and his advisers thought long and hard for an obscure policy question on which they could trip her up.

I can't recall the details of the question now, but the session came, Hattersley put the question, Thatcher took the bait and gave the reply they'd expected, and RH came back with a one liner that pointed out that official government policy was the exact opposite of what she'd just said. Apparently there was a tangible pause before Thatcher stood to give her response, and in that moment she "lost" the session, Labour MPs crowed in delight etc.

But the interesting point about this story is that Hattersley describes how he felt so smug at having tripped her up... for about 60 seconds. His second emotion was shame at the realisation that he and his advisers, grown men, had wasted an entire morning planning a question on an obscure subject with the express intent of embarrassing the PM.

That to me encapsulates the pointlessness of PMQs. All this talk about winners and losers, and people slaughtering each other - it's missing the point.

In my view we should return to the system which prevailed until the 1970s when MPs tabled their questions in advance, and could then follow up with a second question on the day. It would get a much more considered - and informative - response.

Except of course none of DC'S questions were trivial Bruce or did you think they were?

PMQ,S is simply theatre of interest only to those with political axe to grind.It matters very little to the wider electorate.The only importance this has is the on morale of the respective tribes.This can in time also migrate through to the press who cover and write about politics each day.Neither effect will however play decisively with the electorate.

That said it was obvious that Brown struggled today.Cameron is better at doing this simply because he has done it for the past year and a half.Brown will go away and tear a strip off those who briefed him so badly.It is unlikely that he will ever perform well in this arena he is simply too dull.

In assembling a cabinet of sycophants Brown has also ensured he will receive no critiscism however constructive.He is in dire need of a Reid in there.Cameron will be pleased to have raised morale and steadied his ship.He must now pull together a broad set of plocies informed by the groups soon to report.In this he would do well to ensure that he offers solutions to real problems of those who, care not one jot for PMQ's or those who write about it.

It is time to stop pretending that presentation will deliver and talk turkey.

"Except of course none of DC'S questions were trivial Bruce"

Don't know about the questions. It is Cameron who is utterly trivial.

Small earthquake in Westminster. Not many dead.

Hattersley's question wasn't trivial, and that wasn't my point.

Nor to I mean to downplay the importance of Hizb ut Tahrir (since that is the question on which it's generally agreed Brown's answer was sub-standard, and hence where Cameron "slaughtered" him)

However, to be frank, asking about Hizb ut Tahrir today strikes me as a bit cheap - it was a very specific question, only very loosely related to the latest terror, the Home Office have been dealing with it pretty well and it was clearly a very long way down Brown's briefing papers - so much so that he obviously hadn't got to it by this lunchtime.

Brown's response that he will examine the evidence in a calm way struck me as pretty reasonable in the circumstances. A bit of honesty from a Prime Minister, saying "I don't know, I'll look into it" is rather refreshing - but of course it doesn't make a great headline.

As for the comments on this thread all I can say that the slogan home of grassroots Conservatives at the top of the page is looking more and more like an infringement of the trade discription act!

Jack Stone = Outed UKIP troll

One thing everyone has missed this one, including me firstly...

When the easy set question was asked about the anti-bully initative, one would think it would be a tee-up for Brown, but he actually answered....

...blah blah I agree... I was lucky enough to visit a bullying initative with the secetary of satate the other day"


Just watched it on the No.10 website. I don't understand - honestly - the "narrow win" thesis. Yes, I know I think David Cameron is the best thing since sliced avocado and sundried tomato, and when I see him my mind is filled with the joy of a sunny train ride accompanied by ELO singing "Mr Blue Sky", but our leader was dignified, direct and serious, with three simple and important points about security, while the Clunky Fister was a havering nervous wreck.

PMQs doesn't matter to the outside world except in the way that it informs the tone of the media junkies who write the 60second news briefings which *do* have an impact on the outside world.

Tories hit by defection in by-election seat of Ealing Southall

A senior Conservative in the by-election seat of Ealing Southall has defected to the Liberal Democrats, following the imposition of a candidate on the local party by Tory spin doctors.

Mr Brij Mohan Gupta, Deputy Chair (Political) of Ealing Southall Conservatives and Vice-Chair of Southall Green and Southall Broadway Conservative ward parties, has joined the Liberal Democrats and backed the Liberal Democrat candidate Nigel Bakhai.

Commenting, Mr Gupta said:

“Under David Cameron the Conservatives have become a party of style over substance. I agree with everything that Quentin Davies said about Mr Cameron.

“This by-election reflects Mr Cameron’s contempt for local Conservative members. His spin doctors ignored our wishes and forced the branch to accept someone whose commitment to the party is less than a week old. Almost all local Conservative party members feel like I do.

“When Mr Cameron came to Ealing Southall he did not have a single local official with him.

“The Conservative candidate cannot win in Ealing Southall. As the last General Election showed it is the Liberal Democrats who are challenging Labour here.

“I am backing Nigel Bakhai, who will be Ealing Southall’s next MP.”

Chair of the Liberal Democrats Campaign Committee, Edward Davey MP, said:

“I am delighted to welcome Mr Gupta into the Liberal Democrats today.

“Senior Conservative Party members across Ealing Southall are extremely unhappy with the way David Cameron runs the Tory Party.

“People want their political leaders to have clear principles and policies, but under Mr Cameron even once loyal party members say the Conservatives seem prepared to say anything to win votes.”

Joseph is so obviously a labour troll, it is not rising to his bait!

I should have added that I don't read his coments when he 'answers' mine now!

Huge confirmation for DC.

Intelect is putting high thoughts into simple language quickly. TB had it. DC has it. GB does not.

Excellent performance by Cameron. It should be stressed that if we cannot trust Labour to follow through on it's anti-terror measures post 7/7, particularly on deportation of extremist leaders and a crackdown on feeder groups, how can it be expected to be trusted to do so now?

Oh Dear Patsy miffed are?... throwing a "Violet Elizabeth,tut tut who would have expected that

Joseph is a Labour supporter and never made any secret of that fact,
what I certainly am not is a troll, what you see is what you get.
Perhaps you just might answer after you finish "Preparing the Supper" by that time you may have though up an adequate respose.
On second thoughts, I am quite sure there will be a good many knights in shining armour come to your aid.
Bet you can't resist answering though Patsy.

Is it not ironic that GB relies on the 5 day defence when he has built his reputation as chancellor by dropping an entire budget on the leader of the opposition, giving him less than 5 minutes to prepare a response ?

Although cameron didnt say anything about the stupid 5 days comment, watching him on the news, hes facial expression said it all. He looked so dissapointed at browns answer, he was the one that looked solid and experienced. DC did really well and after a rough week for us this is fantastic news!

The comments to this entry are closed.



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:

    • Tracker 2
    • Extreme Tracker