Cameron Vs Brown: Their first PMQs

2.40pm: Earlier on I said a narrow win for David Cameron.  Other observers are suggesting a pretty conclusive win for the Tory leader.  A journalist from the BBC has just used the word "triumph" to me!  Ben Brogan has a good post looking at what went wrong for Brown.

Editor's view: "A narrow win for David Cameron - mainly because of GB's silly defence on Hizb ut-Tahrir that he'd only been in the job for five days.  John Reid's intervention almost belittled the new PM.  This is a tricky time for David Cameron.  He cannot go for Brown's jugular in the way he would if we did not have the security scares.  Overall Nick Robinson says that the Tory MPs have a spring in their step after PMQs.  A good PMQs for Ming, too, because of that joke."

ToryRadio has the audio.

12.30pm: Anne Mcintosh asks about flooding and cuts in flood protection measures.

12.27pm: James Gray repeats Rob Wilson's complaint that the Defence Secretary should not share his workload by also having to be SoS for Scotland.

12.18pm: Rob Wilson asks why the Defence Secretary is now a part-time job. Brown responds with a lame joke.

12.17pm: John Reid urges Brown not to be rushed into precipitate bans on organisations like Hizb ut-Tahrir.

12.17pm: Ming uses his second question to encourage Brown to reverse Government support for nuclear power stations and to abolish council tax.

12.16pm: Best joke so far... Brown says that his door is always open to the Leader of the LibDems... Ming responds by saying that Brown's door is more like a trap door!

12.15pm: Ming Campbell calls for a fresh start from Brown on withdrawing from Iraq, the BAe arms deal and the one-sided extradition deal with the USA.

12.12pm: The Prime Minister gets the last word in response to DC's sixth summarising question by encouraging the Tories to support the spending that will be necessary for security and says that the best message that Parliament can send out to terrorists is bipartisan resolve.

12.09pm: GB promises to consider DC's recommendation of a national border police force.  In the spirit of bipartisanship he urges DC to embrace ID cards and quotes Dame Pauline Neville-Jones' alleged support for them.  DC responds by quoting Alistair Darling's historical opposition to ID cards.

12.07pm: DC presses GB again - saying that this is an organisation that has supported the killing of Jews.  GB says that he's only been in the job five days.  Cameron says the Government promised to outlaw Hizb ut-Tahrir two years ago.

12.05pm: DC urges the PM to outlaw extremist organisations like Hizb ut-Tahrir.  A plea he made a year ago.   Gordon Brown fails to answer the question.

12.04pm: David Cameron encourages the Government to authorise the use of intercept evidence.  The PM promises co-operation with the Opposition on the issue.

12.01pm: Daniel Kawczynski MP asks Gordon Brown his first PMQs question on the status of Shropshire as a unitary authority.

11.59am: Andrew Neil hands over to live coverage in the Commons and says 'We do not want to miss ANY of this historic occasion?'  What could he be meaning?

11.45am: Nigel Griffiths MP tells the Daily Politics that Gordon Brown does have a sense of humour and recounts a joke that he made at Nicholas Ridley's expense in the late 1980s.  Andrew Neil says that was twenty years ago - has he said anything funny since?!

Comments

[Mark Fulford]

...what you see is what you get.

Yes, exactly. What we see is a person who says they’re interested in debate, but who’s far more likely to taunt than make a sensible argument. In your early days on CH I bothered to engage you on Brown’s handling of economy. Instead of challenging any of my arguments or making your own, you simply called me a “Smart Alec”.

Patsy, who needs no knights, is quite right that there’s no point in taking your comments seriously. You could change that by making sensible arguments.

[Tory T]

I just watched the report on News 24 - they said Brown was awful, Cameron and Ming good. They showed DC and Ming's best lines and Brown's worst bits. The 5 days thing was reported as "It was a weak answer and everybody knew it.".

[Joseph]

Yes Mark and you fully deserved it.
I told you quite honestly that I was not an expert on financial affairs and your immediate action was to ridicule me.
The only problem was you did not expect the reply you got so your immediate reaction to hide your hurt pride was a "Smart Alec" answer that said more about you than it did me.
One last thing was your vanity so wounded that you do not or cannot see a bit of teasing, have you no sense of humour?
I know this ias your second try to even the score but like the first time you have failed miserably.
Try again!!!

[Joseph]

Yes Mark and you fully deserved it.
I told you quite honestly that I was not an expert on financial affairs and your immediate action was to ridicule me.
The only problem was you did not expect the reply you got so your immediate reaction to hide your hurt pride was a "Smart Alec" answer that said more about you than it did me.
One last thing was your vanity so wounded that you do not or cannot see a bit of teasing, have you no sense of humour?
I know this ias your second try to even the score but like the first time you have failed miserably.
Try again!!!

[Tory T]

Michael White of the Guardian filed a gushing report on Brown - later forced to file this correction:

"Since filing my lunchtime report on Gordon Brown's first PMQs, the media pack at Westminster has reached what may look like a consensus that Brown was a disaster. It happens that way sometimes, as it did the day David Cameron made his breakthrough speech in the leadership hustings at the 2005 Tory conference.

Cameron was good (so, unexpectedly, was Liam Fox), but not as stunning as TV correspondents told each other in the next hour or so. The newspapers felt obliged to follow suit, it was such a dramatic twist."

[malcolm]

Good, always nice to see that pompous fool Michael White taken down a peg or two.

[Mark Fulford]

I told you quite honestly that I was not an expert on financial affairs...

That became obvious the moment you wrote "...Brown has at least been the most succesful Chancellor since the days of Roy Jenkins".

There, you see, I do have a sense of humour.

[Joseph]

That became obvious the moment you wrote "...Brown has at least been the most succesful Chancellor since the days of Roy Jenkins".

Now in my book Mark, that would have been something to debate about, an honest difference of opinion, instead you tried to confront and ridicule.
I notice you have omitted to address that point.
You are still reducing yourself to the lowest form of wit and highest form of ignorance, sarcasm coupled with ridicule once again.
Keep keep trying, you just might score and make a direct hit in try No 3.
In the meantime you have a good-night!
It will keep me awake all night worrying about your reply, you have come up with such sensible and adult remarks, so much so it quite overwhelms me.

[malcolm]

I know I'm not as old as you Joseph but I was unaware that Roy Jenkins was ever chancellor. His 'days' as Home Secretary coincided with Wilsons sterling devaluation. I suppose compared to that Brown did alright,he only concerned himself with wrecking final salary pension schemes and presided over Britons taking £1,300,000,000,000 of personal debt.

[Bruce Bould]

malcolm, given the amount of pontification I've seen from you on this board (along the lines of "Brown is the worst ever..." etc.) I'm intrigued you so casually admit your ignorance of Chancellors of the Exchequer past, as it makes me wonder who/what you are comparing the current government to? (Incidentally to remedy this I recommend Jenkins's own book, 'The Chancellors', which includes well-written biographies of all holders of the post from Randolph Churchill to Hugh Dalton (sorry, I guess you've never heard of either of them because you're too young).)

Just to set you straight on a couple of facts: Jenkins was NOT Chancellor when the pound was devalued, Callaghan was.

Callaghan resigned, and Wilson appointed Jenkins to replace him, Callaghan becoming Home Secretary.

Jenkins is actually fairly highly regarded as a Chancellor by most commentators and historians - he was certainly the best regarded Labour Chancellor before Brown came along. And he bequeathed to his successor an economy in a better state than any subsequent Chancellor until Ken Clarke (a legacy which Ted Heath's government managed to squander within four years, as we know).

[Yet Another Anon]

I know I'm not as old as you Joseph but I was unaware that Roy Jenkins was ever chancellor. His 'days' as Home Secretary
Jim Callaghan resigned over the devaluation (unlike Norman Lamont years later in 1992) because he lied to the house in saying that there would be no devaluation in the hope of averting a collapse in Sterling.

[Joseph]

Malcolm, I hardly think that Mr Brown can be held responsible for the irresponsible people who live well beyond their means.
It is not Mr Browns fault that we live in a "Spend now pay later society" just because people are foolish enough to spend as though money was going out of fashion.
In my younger days we all in general were terrified of getting into debt as we simply did not have the cah to pay it back. When we said we had "No Money" that is exactly was what we meant.
If people are stupid enough to have huge debts because of keeping up with the Jones's to have things like Cars,Boats etc on top of huge mortgages ( I do not condemn people for those) and probably young families to provide for, that is more down to their own stupidity rather than anything the Chancellor has done.
You do have a bad time with me one way or another Malcolm, perhaps if you stopped trying so hard and became less inclined to trip people up to settle imaginary scores you just might fare better.
Being old is not called being "Daft" it means we have lived longer that's all.
I do not need any reminding how old I am, but perhaps if you were to look on my age as something to learn from and ask questions about rather than seeing just how far you can go. We both just may benefit from the experience.
In the mean time I have lived, like a good many more people through some hard times.
People should stop blaming governments from all the ills of this world and start looking more towards their own doorsteps and learn to become more responsible for their own actions and live by the decisions they themselves make.

[Traditional Tory]

Jenkins was Chancellor of the Exchequer 30 from November 1967 – 19 June 1970. I can just remember that, but Malcolm was no doubt in - or more likely out of - his pram at the time.

Sadly, our Malcolm is not exactly a fount of knowledge.

[Mark Fulford]

...that would have been something to debate about, an honest difference of opinion

Joseph, I don’t think you’re here for genuine debate. You can prove me wrong on any thread by making an argument and then defending it.

[malcolm]

I stand corrected ,it was late at night , but I should have known that,sorry.
The fact remains that under Brown personal debt has spiralled to the highest levels ever and the savings ratio has declined to its lowest level in modern memory.
Of course Brown cannot be held responsible for the actions of feckless people or irresponsible lenders but there are a few things he can be held responsible for.
The abolition of PEPs and Tessas to be replaced by vastly inferior products, the abolition of advanced corporation tax for pension schemes, , too many tax rises to mention and a doubling of council tax.
Many people think he's been a successful chancellor as the economy has continued to grow during his tenure,I think he's been a disaster and this country will be paying for his mistakes long after he's left office.

[Joseph]

Mark, I have done and had some extremely good debates with people.
A lot of people on this very thread can vouch for that.
What we all had in common was, we all treated one another's opinions with respect and no one person seen it as an exercise in trying to out-do or humiliate one another.
When all is said and done about opinion, it is not only our right to state them, they are all like our vote of equal value.
The debates remained good humoured and fruitful from start to finish.
I would suggest you try it now and again, but it would be helpful if you remember that whilst you may not agree with people it serves no purpose to ridicule them after all what sort of world would this be if we all held the same opinion?.
Now Mark having said all that, I enjoy debate that is why I come to this site. I do not enjoy people trying to belittle me...when I want to play games I have an abundance of grandchildren and great-grandchildren to do that with.
I am drawing a line under this.

[northern emigre]

Why does anyone bother trying to engage with an obviously sad, attention-seeeking troll like "Joseph"?

Just ignore the wretch and he might go attention-seeking elsewhere.

[Joseph]

I am disgusted with the level that northern emigre has brough this thread down to. Who put him up to it?
I could make a calculated guess.
What sort of morons spawned this piece of vermin, the mother ought to be sterilised and the father castrated.
I would be even more disgusted to think that this has been the response of a so called adult.