First blood to Cameron in Commons blast at Brown

Gordon Brown has told the Commons that he wants to deliver a new "constitutional settlement" for the British people:

• He promised twelve transfer of powers from the Prime Minister and the Executive to Parliament - including the Executive's powers to declare war, request the dissolution of Parliament and key public appointments (including the Governor of the Bank of England and Church of England bishops).
• He promised the creation of a National Security Council - an idea already proposed by Pauline Neville-Jones some months ago (he went on to nick at least two other Tory ideas).
• He promised a new ministerial code overseen by an independent adjudicator.
• He also called for a cross-party debate on a new written Constitution and floated ideas such as weekend voting and a lower voting age.
• In his only clear nod to the LibDems on PR he promised a full report on the success of the new voting methods used since Labour came to power.
• Some civil libertarians would be pleased with his announcement that the restrictions on protests in Parliament Square could be lifted.

David Cameron then had an opportunity to respond - in his first parliamentary clash with Gordon Brown as the new Prime Minister - and his response was very impressive.  In a key passage he said:

"Constitutional change is not the solution because the constitution is not the cause: the cause is broken promises. People will ask how the person who broke this trust can be the person to mend it."

British life is too centralised, the Leader of the Opposition said, and Gordon Brown had been the great centraliser of the last ten years.

The new Prime Minister wants more openness and honesty but as Chancellor, Gordon Brown had levied taxation stealthily and failed to answer questions on the tax credit chaos.

He challenged Gordon Brown to reverse the transfer of power from democratically elected local councils to unelected regional assemblies.

What was the new Prime Minister going to do about the fact that there were two classes of MP in Britain?  MPs for English seats who had no influence on Scottish matters and Scottish MPs like Gordon Brown who could decide how English hospitals and schools were run.

He ended with an attack on Gordon Brown's failure to grant a referendum on the draft European Treaty.  It was, David Cameron said, yet another broken Labour promise.

The Prime Minister responded by joking that he thought David Cameron had wanted to end Punch and Judy politics.  He quoted Ken Clarke two or three times to back up his positions and embarrass David Cameron but this was definitely an exchange won by the Conservative leader.  He will have raised morale on the Tory benches.  It's the first Brown-Cameron PMQs tomorrow.  ConservativeHome will be live blogging it.

Comments

[Serf]

Martin Bristow says:

We may have issues with our leadership,I certainly do,but I unreservedly detest all that Brown stands for.

Thanks for that flash of realism. DC has his weaknesses, but Brown represents everything that is diametrically opposed to the philosophy of Conservatism. Those Conservatives that do nothing but slag off DC are only helping this socialist disaster to stay in government after the next election.

[William Norton]

Ken Stevens:Erastianism - the theory that the State should have authority over the church in ecclesiastical matters. Named after Thomas Erastus (1524-83) a Swiss theologian to whom such views were attributed.

If Tom Tom is now citing with approval someone from the 16th Century, does this indicate he's starting to move towards the modernisers? A complete sell-out on his part - clearly only interested in office for its own sake. Continuining at this rate, I estimate Tom Tom will join the 21st century sometime around November 2019.

[Jake]

JamesB | July 03, 20:50

"What is this 'English votes for English issues' nonsense? Are we not a Unionist party any more?"

JamesB must have been living on the other side of the moon these last 10 years !

Remarkable that anyone can come out with this in 2007 ie 9 years after the passing if the Scotland Act and the setting up of a separate parliament from the Union parliament.

The UK has always been a multinational state which the British parliament at Westminster used the ENGLISH principles of fair play , over the years , to mediate between the various interests . It worked quite well for a long while . It suited me just fine .

And it ended in 1998 .

In 1998 , Scotland was granted a NATIONAL parliament , specifically to the NATION , the PEOPLE and the COUNTRY of Scotland .

England was pointedly left out .

This has precipitated a savage and continuing grab for the spoils of the British state which the political English have completely failed to even acknowledge yet alone compete in . This is exemplified by the almost total failure of the 529 MP's for English constituencies to organise and compete - even mildly- for a fair share of the cake .

Andrew Lilico's sentimental bleating about the Union of the past which is now dead is typical of a frame of mind , all too prevalent in the Conservative Party , which refuses to connect with the new reality . Wistful and wishful fealings for the past will not make the past come back . It is gone . Come into the present .

Of COURSE , EVOEM and its better alternative , an English Parliament , are a manifestation of nationalism - a completely secondary nationalism forced upon the English by the ending of the old order of the British unitary state .

Just face this and get to grips with new reality which forced upon us .
This reality is that England AS England has to compete in the this new British state . The only way to do this is that the representives of England combine as a distinct entity and forge a policy and an arena for enforcing that policy . The celts are having a field day because this has not yet been done .

The many suggestions for EVOEM in the British parliament do not aknowledge that this would be so divisive , cumbersome and unsatisfactory to both English and non English that it would be lethal for that same parliament .

The alternative idea , of an English Parliament , is one which the English , who see the Scots national parliament regularly on their TV screens , can easily grasp .
It will produce a federal British state in which I hope the English will conduct themselves with their traditional restraint and sense of decency . It must , however , be a national parliament prepared robustly to defend English interests because , in the new arrangement of things , there is no other viable way .

[Andrew Lilico]

[email protected]:01

I've not given up on the United Kingdom yet, and I think your counsel of despair is as yet unnecessary. It is perfectly straightforward to negate the centrifugal forces created by devolution - just introduce regional assemblies throughout England and Wales. The most important constitutional threats do not come from the "celts", as you describe them, but from attacks at the Union level - on the Monarchy , other elements of the balance of power, and the traditional liberties of Englishmen such as the right to silence, the right to face your accusers, the liberty to walk the streets without subjection to arbitrary powers, and so on. If Britain dies it will die at the aggregate level, not by being dismembered - unless the English listen to you and dismember it themselves...

[Ken Stevens]

Andrew Lilico | July 04, at 12:28

I cannot countenance English regional assemblies for as long as we are politically within EU. These would be a Trojan Horse for absorption as part of a single European entity.

Withdraw from the EU superstate project and regionalisation might get to be debated rationally, though the North-east didn't seem to like the idea when put to them in a referendum. Given the general presumption by politicos that the public don't care about Europe, I presume that outcome cannot be attributed to euroscepticism. Also, I would find it difficult to accept Scotland as being one region, defined by its national borders. Maybe there should be two: Highland & Island and Lowland. Indeed maybe we should not be constrained by existing boundaries, for example the Scottish and English border lands could warrant a single, cohesive regional administration. ... And the moment someone bridles up at such an infringement of national sensibilities, I revert to being a one-nation/one parliament Englishman!

[Jake]

Andrew , you are wrong.

I have not given up on the United Kingdom . I am simply recognising what you refuse to recognise ; that from now on the a new United Kingdom prevails and that this is a Union in the component nations compete for power and scarce resources at British level and guard power via national parliaments within their own countries .

Much the same as any number of federal nations across the world .

Your proposal of splitting England into totally artifial and unhistorical mini states plays directly into the hands of celtic atavism which frequently proposes just that . Celtic atavism expresses itself often in anti Englishness .You may have noticed . It is ,regretably , a powerful force and one which the English will in the end have come to terms with . Your abject suggestion that we comply with it and abolish ourselves " for the good of the Union " will not assuage that force , only make it more aggressive and nationalistic .

Far from proposing "a counsel of despair " I am proposing one of hope for a British future . A federal future ,that is ,and one will finally bring about a rational and non divisive organisation for the United Kingdom which in IMO should have been in place since 1707 .

Your concern for " the Monarchy , other elements of the balance of power, and the traditional liberties of Englishmen such as the right to silence, the right to face your accusers, the liberty to walk the streets without subjection to arbitrary powers, and so on. "
is very English . It is not British . I share them . You should not confuse the two .

The way to guard these ideals is not to entrust people from other countries to do so. Mr Brown's record of anti Englishness is of longstanding . I doubt he cares much for " the traditional liberties of Englishmen ". ( though he will protest he does )

An English Parliament will revive the wilted trust of the English in politics . It will also revive loyalty to the British cause throughout the United Kingdom .

I also suspect that vis a vis Scotland ( where there is a large majority approval of the idea of an English Parliament ), Scots will find the fact of dealing with it a refreshing and psychologically more satisfying process than their daily brutal trampling on the compliant and uplifted faces of " English " MP's .

[Blaise Matthews]

Personally i think it was obvious to the house that Cameron had come off on top, being the naturally better speaker and evidently a competent orator.

however it does seem that he surrendered to much of the atrocious ideas of Brown. And what opposition there was, seemed lack lustre.

I'm feel it comes across distinctly un-conservative but perhaps that’s what Camerons aiming for?