David Cameron's response to The Queen's Speech (highlights)

6.45pm: Guido has a graphic that the Brownites will hate.

4.30pm: I won't endear myself to the diehard loyalists with this verdict but Brown did okay this afternoon.  He wasn't as witty as Cameron.  Nor as smooth.  But he was weightier.  Cameron's remarks were light on policy.  Peter Riddell wrote last week that our party still had some way to go on policy substance.  Peter was right.  Brown also thinks he is on to a winning theme with whether or not the Conservatives will hold a referendum on the EU Treaty, should it be ratified.  He kept inviting David Cameron to say whether he would or not.  An uncomfortable-looking Cameron stayed glued to the green benches.  He did get up later - challenging Gordon Brown on whether he had looked at the opinion polls before cancelling the election and if he had planned to cut IHT before the Tory plan was announced.  The Tories roared with laughter when Brown said the IHT tax cut had been long in the pipeline.  I wouldn't say that Brown won the exchanges but this was an improved performance and a clear signal of his attempt to revert to his pre-Chicken Saturday strategy: I'm fit to be PM; Cameron is all PR.  Brown will find that a much harder sell than it was six weeks ago.

Fraser Nelson otoh thinks Cameron easily won the exchanges.

4.25pm: Download a PDF of Cameron's full text. ToryRadio has the audio.

Not verbatim:

3.30pm: David Cameron finishes by listing what Britain really needs.  He lists key Tory pledges on school reform, the environment and the family.

3.28pm: This is an incompetent government.  Its own lab caused Foot and Mouth.  We've had the first run on a British bank.  The Government doesn't know how many immigrants are in Britain.  The PM's British Jobs for British Workers pledge is illegal.  Where was the PM's moral compass when he borrowed slogans from the BNP and National Front?

3.27pm: This is a government of dithering and U-turns.  School surpluses. Taxes on bins. Entrepreneurs pay CGT. And then the biggest U-turn of all - the election was called off.  We've swapped a strong PM for a weak one.

3.25pm: Labour backbencher asks if Cameron will offer a referendum if the Treaty is ratified?  Cameron responds by saying he wants a referendum now and calls on Labour MPs to vote for it.

3.24pm: There is only one black hole in British politics and that's where the Prime Minister's credibility  used to be.

3.21pm: Where is the Government's vision?  His Budget wasn't a tax cut, it was a tax con.  His Party Conference speech was a laundry list of small promises.  It was a speech borrowed from John Kerry.  The Pre-Budget Report had a flight tax, inheritance tax and non-dom tax - all taken from the Conservatives.  The PM has nothing new to offer.

3.20pm: Attacks proposed abolition of A-levels, slamming on the brakes on City Academies and Labour's obsession with top-down control.

3.19pm: Attacks the PM's promise of deep-cleaning for the NHS.  What needs a real deep clean is the Government's reputation for half-truths.

3.17pm: The real problem with this Prime Minister and this Queen's speech is that it's all quick fixes and no long-term thinking.

3.16pm: Quick mention of Brown's broken promise on referendum.

3.15pm: There is no case for extra state funding of political parties unless there is a cap on all sources of donation.  Having chickened out of one election, Brown wants to fix the next.

3.15pm: Welcomes Counter-terrorism Bill and inclusion of Tory recommendation of post-charge questioning.

3.13pm: We welcome some Bills - not least those we proposed.  Some of these Bills have been recycled including the one on CrossRail - announced 11 times before.

3.12pm: After jokey responses to the traditional speeches from the Government backbench David Cameron invites the Prime Minister to comment on strategy in Afghanistan.

Comments

[David]

Did anyone else catch that little sneer on Gordon's face when Cameron mentioned 'fixing elections'? It was the look of a man who refuses to listen to anything said against him, rather than someone planning to engage in a debate.

[Andrew Woodman]

Good stuff from Cameron so far.

[Kevin Davis]

Doing very well!!

He really has grown into liking the despatch box.

[Martin Wright]

I thought David Cameron was excellent, ranging from witty and charming to pugnacious.I'm not sure, however, whether producing the BNP and National Front leaflets about "British Jobs..." was such a good idea.

[Malcolm Dunn]

Nick Assinder over at the BBC seems a bit underwhelmed by this Queens Speech. If Brown cannot convince Nick, who can he convince?

[Andrew Woodman]

Brown just lied about IHT. Couldn’t look Cameron in the eye.

[Tony Makara]

David Cameron on very good form. Gordon Brown made to look foolish. I liked the bit about a black hole, Gordon Brown is definitely the collapsing star in a collapsing government.

[Jones]

DC was awesome. Gutted he had to sit down.

[Alex Law]

DC was Great!!! I can't wait for PMQ's!

[Votedave]

I wonder how much of this great response will feature on the Biased Broadcasting Corporation news at 6:00?
Five seconds or ten?

[Simon]

I know how much you hate to criticise Dave but looks like your a lone voice again. Fraser Nelson says Dave won hands down. He's no Cameroon but at least he's always objective.

[CCHQ Spy]

Yeah, Brown was better today Editor but from a low, low base.

[Dontmakemelaugh]

Broon I am sorry to have to say, found the chink in Cameron's credibiltiy armoured protection suit, which, as time goes by, Broon will attack with a tin opener. When asked if he would hold a referendum if the EU Treaty was ratified, Golden Tonsils declined to answer and seemed to have lost his voice. Trouble in store for the future. Mind the gap! The cedibility one.

[Bill Brinsmead]

Wrong again Editor … David Cameron gave a cogent, coherent and compelling speech. Brown was pedestrian and unconvincing.

[David]

Surely it's not really Cameron's job at this thing to be weighty on policy? He laid out some basic ideas - more like grand themes if you like, but ideas none the less. On the other hand, he was successful in pointing out the reheated nature of a lot of what was in the Speech, which is what I thought he was supposed to do. I agree that the party need to come out firmly on this EU treaty thing, either by saying we will have a retrospective referendum, or that they'd just roll back the legislation. Either way is fine, since they have made it very clear they are against the treaty/constitution, but there needs to be confirmation. But overall I thought Cameron was very much on top today.

[Tony Makara]

David Cameron was successful in ridiculing Gordon Brown on his big day. Not unlike Ronald Regans classic retort to Jimmy Carter in the presidential debates. "There he goes again". As Arthur Schopenhauer wrote sometimes it pays just to make your opponent look like a fool.

[christina]

Cameron has chickened out about the EU Constitution. If so it's curtains for him - another broken promise.

[Gordon Henderson]

It's rare that I disagree with you, Tim, but today you are wrong on three counts.

1) David Cameron was excellent and once again showed that he has what it takes to be Prime Minister.

2) Gordon Brown was awful and once again showed why he simply does not have what it takes to be Prime Minister.

3) You have fallen into the trap of repeating Brown's accusations that David Cameron did not spell out Conservative policies. I would remind you that this Queen's Speech was written by Brown, not Cameron. It set out Labour's policies and David Cameron's task was to pick holes in those policies, which he did well. Anyway, what is the point of putting forward more Conservative policies, only to see Brown steal them? Better to keep our powder dry for another few months.

[HF]

DC did a very good job. He has delivered enough policy so far, anymore and it will just get pinched.

Would you rather have IDS at the despatch box?

[christina]

HF @1723 "Would you rather have IDS at the despatch box?" Since you ask - Yes. I may not always have agreed with IDS but he didn't break his promises..... or equivocate so much that you suspect he's about to.

[Northernhousewife]

Dear Editor,
There is a revealing story in the Times [online/article 281115].
Labour spin doctors briefed local journalists that a school in their area was to be mentioned by name and praised in a speech by the PM on education. Flattering stories follow in all the local press. None of the schools were actually mentioned in the speech at all.
Old habits don't die, only integrity

[Andrew Woodman]

I don't see the argument about policy. We've had all our policies nicked by Labour. What's the point in giving them more. We announced firm policy on immigration last week as well.

[Northernhousewife]

Sorry Editor .Article 2814115

[David]

"Broon I am sorry to have to say, found the chink in Cameron's credibiltiy armoured protection suit, which, as time goes by, Broon will attack with a tin opener. When asked if he would hold a referendum if the EU Treaty was ratified,"

Not really a chink, only to the Euro-obsessed. All Cameron has to say is either, as he did today which is that forget the future, he wants one now, or instead to draw an analogy to horses and stable doors and note that it is rather typical of this government-it's always playing catch up.

[Jennifer Wells]

Brown was much better today.

Cameron's speech was too light.

No big theme.

Just jokes. Some of them not that good.

[greg]

People going on about a referendum after ratification are talking nonsense. There would be no point in having a referendum if it wouldn't change anything - it would just annoy people when they voted against it to no avail.

What is important is that the Conservatives lay out clearly that they won't just "accept" the ratification as it is and how they will actively work to change the UK relationship, referendum or no referendum.

[Martin Cole]

Brown and Cameron stayed to listen to Cable who made the best points, especially on an EU referendum which is where Conservative policy is now most definitely really severely lacking either content or thought.

Fancy Brown scoring best over the EU Reform Treaty!

[Edison Smith]

In case anyone has forgotten (Mr Editor?!), we are the official Opposition, not the government, and as this is the first day of a new government session, why should it be those not in government to provide the policy??

The fact is, Brown's 'vision' is woeful and woefully lacking in any imagination. He is a weak Prime Minister and his front bench is inept.

His statement today was depressing, depressing, depressing. And not just the contents, but the delivery style. At one point the Speaker had to tell the House to "stop having their own private conversations" during the statement, because everyone was bored and no one was listening.

The same could not be said of Mr Cameron's. Clever, funny, and hitting the bullseye everytime (as Jon Pienaar conceded on 5 Live), it was like light and shade: Brown - the miserable, cycnical past, having to read from notes and stuttering; Cameron - the lithe future, vibrant and vigorous.

What is most telling is the seemingly utter lack of any enthusiasm for Brown or his agenda from the benches behind.

When he stands at the despatch box, he stands infront of bemused faces who look a touch embarrassed that this is the man who plotted for 13 years to get where he is, only to achieve his ambition and blow it all big time.

Morale is essential, and one feels Labour's is at a low ebb. Fundamentally, they are disappointed with their leader, but they are all political dwarves simply too scared to confront their Stalinist leader.

But the country is not too scared to vote him out at the ballot box...

[Dontmakemelaugh]

People going on about a referendum after ratification are talking nonsense. There would be no point in having a referendum if it wouldn't change anything - it would just annoy people when they voted against it to no avail.

What is important is that the Conservatives lay out clearly that they won't just "accept" the ratification as it is and how they will actively work to change the UK relationship, referendum or no referendum.

Posted by: greg | November 06, 2007 at 18:06

Then why did Cameron give his "caste iron" guarantee as reported in the Sun, I believe? Why should we believe anything he says? He appears to be just your usual run of the mill double talking politician. A man for all seasons is our Dave - not to be taken seriously, I certainly don't which is a shame because I wanted to. Caste Iron or putty?

[Adrian Owens]

Just heard on the Radio 4 6pm news that the Government are planning to release documents "under the Freedom of Information Act" that "prove" the Government was looking at reforming Inheritance Tax before the Conservative conference.

Advice to ministers for policy making is exempt from the Freedom of Information Act if I recall correctly, and much as I would like to see this so-called evidence, we should not let the Government rewrite the legislation and pick and choose what is released for party political gain.

[R.Rowan]

If David Cameron lets the people of this country down on a referendum he will lose the next election, as he will be no better than Brown.We need democracy and we need a firm position on this now.LISTENING TO THE VOICE OF THE PEOPLE IS DEMOCRACY.

[christina]

Greg @1806 "There would be no point in having a referendum if it wouldn't change anything "

Haven't you noticed that the Italians have just defied the EU and WON and changed the whole policy on repatriation? So a referendum could lead to lots of changes including the perfectly legal abrogation of the treaty / Constitiution.

Those here who sneer at us "Euro-obsessives" had better wake up to the fact that 80% of the population want their say on this Constitution. If Cameron lets them down his ratings will be back in the doldrums like greased lightning.

[Perdix]

Editor - as others have pointed out here, this debate is about GOVERNMENT policy, not a place to lay out Conservative policies.
As a eurosceptic, I am disappointed that so many posting here bang on about a referendum after ratification and not a word about Labour policies, which do not include any kind of referendum. Truly obsessive, and probably not members of the Tory party.I think I recognise ukip's Christina Spite @ 18.54.

[strapworld]

Vince Cable putting the Lib Dems case is a trap for Cameron.

He should make an announcement that the Conservative Party will support the Liberal Ammendment and should the ammendment fail PROMISE that a future Conservative Government WILL hold a referendeum on EU membership.

That will end all the Brown scheming and keep the troops happy.

[Patsy Sergeant]

Christina @ 18.54 - Regarding the Italians practical attitude to protecting their country from itinerant con-men, thieves and murderers, we don't have to worry about the EU undermining our protection of our country, as we have done it ourselves!!!! The Repatriation of Prisoners Act 1984, states that, consent is needed of the - sentencing state, the receiving state, AND THE PRISONER, before said prisoner can be repatriated. Now how many of the 356 Somalian prisoners would choose to go back to prison in their own country?

[activist]

Tim, Ben Brogan doesn't share your assessment either. It seems most commentators were scoring this for Cameron.

"Strangely flat occasion in the Commons this afternoon. David Cameron was funny and quick, and skewered Gordon Brown on the "bottled election". The Prime Minister did what he feels most comfortable with - attacking the Tories. For all the talk of new politics, an end to dividing lines and getting on with Government, Mr Brown's speech was red meat, the kind of thing you'd expect for an election opener. As I mentioned yesterday, the plan is to use the new legislative session to pick away at Tory policy positions - or lack of them - on just about every issue. Not that anyone seemed particularly interested, even on the Labour benches."

http://broganblog.dailymail.co.uk/2007/11/so-will-they-pu.html

[activist]

And how Nick Assinder of the BBC viewed it:

"Big day

It may be a decent longer term strategy, we will see. But on this particular day it meant Mr Cameron rose to the occasion (or the bait, as Mr Brown might see it) and delivered another of his confident, even cocky performances.

Not only did he at one point beckon Labour MPs to "come on and have a go if you think you are hard enough" - or something like that - but he repeatedly took up the prime minister's challenges to take him on across the despatch box.

That was a bad idea from the prime minister for the simple reason it gave his opponent yet more chances to challenge him to "look me in the eye" and say he really was planning changes to inheritance tax before the Tories came up with them or that he really was not looking at the polls when he called off the election.

It meant that Gordon's big day was in severe danger of turning into David's day."

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/7081423.stm

[greg]

Christina, what's that got to do with a referendum. My point isn't that the Conservatives should just accept the situation post ratification. Just that a referendum would not be necessary, and could just confuse matters. Did the Italians have a referendum? I must have missed it.

[Chad Noble]

Good to see my spot of a post-ratification pledge in the Tory ad being brought up by Brown! :-)

But I can't let Perdix's point be left without reply.

Brown's case is that no referendum is needed because the new treaty is different from the constitution as he has secured vital red lines to protect our sovereignty, and thus is not the constitution (on which the manifesto pledge was made).

Total rubbish of course, but, bizarrely, it actually seems more consistent than Cameron's position which is that this treaty does indeed give away vital powers to Brussels, because the red lines are red herrings, which he opposes and demands a referendum to prevent this massive transfer of power. But if it's ratified then, oh well, too bad.

Of course Cameron is right to focus on demanding a referendum *now*, hoping some guilty Labour and LibDem MP's will honour their manifesto pledge, but look how much it weakens his position when he does not back up his demand by clearly confirming that if Labour and the LibDems break their word, Conservatives won't if given the chance.

It is Cameron's refusal to commit (and even deceive) to a post-ratification referendum that is preventing people getting behind him *now*, as his position looks like one of short-term political opportunism to make the government look bad rather than a principled one seeking to protect Britain's interests.

[michael mcgough]

Perdix;Sorry you are upset but;

"Fancy Brown scoring best over the EU Reform Treaty!"
Cameron seems to flip flop all over with cast iron guarantees going very limp.All Brown has to do is go nuclear and snooker Cameron with an in or out referendum.

[Oscar Miller]

I thought Cameron towered over Brown today, in content, style and wit. Gordon was retreating into his nervous habit of scribbling notes to himself unable to face down and deal with Cameron's criticism. It's intended as a put down I'm sure, but in fact it just looks weak. The broadcast media seem to be talking up the levels of animosity, I think in an attempt to make out that DC is being nasty and personal, instead of conveying the clear political points he was making. They've also omitted any mention of the masterly way Cameron despatched all interventions intended to derail him. The 'black hole' response was terrific. Shows how good he will be if and when he takes PMQs as PM. Overall the entrenched Labour supporting broadcasters don't seem able to adjust to how little Brown is living up to their expectations and how much Cameron is rising above them.

[EML]

Not seeing much of this much-anticipated "vision" from Brown. I would have thought such an occasion as this would have been the perfect opportunity ...

[Perdix]

All you ukippers on here should pay attention. Cameron's pledge was given in the run up to the election which Gordo planned but bottled . Hague's speech at Conference specifically talked about an autumn election i.e: prior to ratification.
Now ukippers, what are your thoughts about Gordo's plan's for this parliament? - or can you only process one thought per day/week/month?

[Northernhousewife]

Channel 4 News was quite devastating for Brown tonight. They spoke of his "fist shaking - was it in fear or rage at Cameron stealing his day?" as they drew their audiences attention to the PMs trembling hand.

"The Shaking Fist"??!!!

[Rod Sellers]

Cameron did well and the BBC Five live judgement of him deftly flashing the Rapier and drawing blood - against the flailing battleaxe of Brown - was accurate. BUT unless Cameron sticks his kneck out on a Post ratification Referendum - he will go down as 'all talk'

[David]

There is a clear difference in having a referendum now, compared with post-signing.

Pre-signing, a rejection by referendum would be much more easily turned into a re-negotiation process. Doing so two or three years after the treaty has been signed and implemented is a different kettle of fish.It would be far, far harder to achieve, hence Cameron would be justified in saying that a referendum prior to signing is really the only chance, which the Prime Minister is simply throwing away.

There are also practical issues as well; any Conservative government is likely to have a small majority, based on current polling and electoral maths.A referendum on such a divisive topic would be draining on the party, and a loss would be a huge blow to a government with a small mandate.

[Richard Carey]

Perdix: Now ukippers, what are your thoughts about Gordo's plan's for this parliament? - or can you only process one thought per day/week/month?

Why put a time limit on it? Judging from here, as well as other experience, I thought they were unable to process more than one thought full stop!

[Malcolm Dunn]

Even Nick Robinson scored it as a Brown loss so I think all but the diehard UKIPers and the always fairminded 'Dontmakemelaugh'can see it was a fairly comprehensive win for Cameron.
Personally I don't think Brown will get far by always demanding answers on policy from Cameron. Brown is after all supposed to be the PM but if today is any guide he just doesn't look or sound like one.

[christina]

Perdix @ 1924, My name is NOT Spite and you know full well it isn't - you're just being rude and childish. Nor have I been in UKIP for the last 6 years. Your contribution is therefore worthless.

Patsy at 2016, You're quite right of course but an Act of the Westminster parliament can be undone by the same body.

Greg @2048 I'm sorry if I misunderstood you but I'm even more confused now. Brown and all his party, all the LibDems and all the Tories were elected on the promise of a referendum. Promises must be kept or voters will be even more turned off all politicians.

David @ 2158. What you are saying in effect is that if the Constitution is in force then we must accept the end of Britain for in one aspect after anlother that is what this Constitutikon does. If thast is the Tory position droves of us, just returning to the fold, will be off again to ensure a Tory defeat and after that, a phoenix-like rebirth . If the Tory party won '/t put Britain first, what IS the point of it?

[sjm]

I understand the Labour benches were not full, that 7 Labour MPs were obviously asleep, and several had their heads in their hands during Brown's performance.

Will Brown still be leader at the next election?

[Chad Noble]

"Cameron's pledge was given in the run up to the election which Gordo planned but bottled"

LoL, good try but Brown specifically referred to the Tory ad published when Cameron *knew* the election had been *cancelled*, but still nationally published an ad that clearly stated that a vote on the EU constitution would be delayed until the election of a Conservative government.

Of course the style was fun, but of course it should have been truthful too.

And I'm not a ukipper either, and was warming to Cameron post-conference until this occurred.

[James Maskell]

I have to sympathise with Brown over the shaking hand. I play Chess and during practice and preparation my nerves are fine since theres no pressure, but whenever Im playing a serious game, I have really bad nerves and Im shaking like Im stuck out in the open air at Christmas... I feel his pain!

Regarding the poster, Cameron should re-iterate to his PPCs what exactly is the referendum pledge as Ive had a contradictory message from one.

[Dontmakemelaugh]

Even Nick Robinson scored it as a Brown loss so I think all but the diehard UKIPers and the always fairminded 'Dontmakemelaugh'can see it was a fairly comprehensive win for Cameron.
Personally I don't think Brown will get far by always demanding answers on policy from Cameron. Brown is after all supposed to be the PM but if today is any guide he just doesn't look or sound like one.

Posted by: Malcolm Dunn | November 06, 2007 at 22:48

I never saw nor heard the exchanges between
Cameron or Brown (Dixon's had their TV's turned off) - so I would not know who "won or lost". I am sure, to quote Dave's wish, that there was not a Punch or Judy in sight.
My concern arose from the editor's description that Cameron declined to answer the question put to him by Broon on his (Cameron's) intention to hold a referendum after the Treaty had been swallowed by Broon in one gulp (along with England).
You can draw your own conclusions as to why Cameron refused to say Yez or Nay. I have drawn mine. Dave is flaky. He has just sacked a man for stating what the great majority believe and now he cannot answer a simple question. The Tories appear to be, as in the quote made to judge by the defence concerning his client: "A hopeless case your, worship". Shame, I so much wanted to vote for them, but I have had enough of spin, but we live in hopes (that have started to fade again).

[Bexie]

The concensus on the news seemed to vary between a Broon Loss and a Cameron Win. (The Bolsheviek Broadcasting Camp is never going to credit the tories with a win...)

The referendum isssue is one that needs resolved, but when talking about chinky armor, a slight dent in Cameron's Plate Mail is nothing compared to the shredded paper suit (with the brown trousers) of cher Broon

[Chad Noble]

I've got to agree with Tim and his summary though. I watched Cameron first, and thought he was great, comfortable, witty, and really going for it. Head and shoulders above Brown in this knock about arena.

But then having watched Brown, nervous etc, hand shaking, not comfortable but still managed to make Cameron look very uncomfortable.

The fact is that few non-political geeks would ever watch these exchanges, but tens, perhaps hundreds, of thousands of people would have read Cameron's clear pledge for a post-ratification EU constitution vote in his national newspapers ads, so any (inevitable) reneging will cost him dearly both within the party (Dan Hannan etc) and the public at large.

[TimC]

The thing that stood out on the news last night was Brown's shaking hand - he was clearly rattled.

[michael]

Editor, you're usually wrong, but this time more than ever. Perhaps deliberately to trigger a more lively discussion?

Brown droned on as usual, making it hard even to follow what he was saying. He lost the house with the speaker having to stop MPs from chatting among themselves and then tried to trip Cameron up only to fall flat on his own face.

Brown wasn't better at all. Weightier? Only in the sense that his 'style' is so heavy that he keeps running into the sand without the wit or rhetorical flair to pull himself out.

[Erasmus]

It was a win for Cameron, but our Editor has a point.

DC is strong on the politics of presentation (a prerequisite for victory) but he needs to work on the politics of policy.

[Northernhousewife]

One of the issues raised on Radio 4 about the events of yesterday's was the departure of Labour MPs from the Chamber, which resulted in ONLY ONE Labour MP staying to debate the Queen's Speech.
A Scots Nats MP asked the killer question : "Will the Scottish Labour MPs who have not stayed to debate what is largely an English-only programme, return to vote on these matters in which they have no interest?"