EDITORIAL VERDICT: David Cameron's confidence seemed to be back today. He hit hard Gordon Brown hard and successfully for the 'no time for a novice line'. Overall a clear victory to the Tory leader. Well done to Nick Clegg, too, for highlighting the potency of Barack Obama's tax-cutting message.
Highlights, not verbatim:
12.22pm: Bernard Jenkin asks why the Government doesn't force the banks it owns to pass on rate cuts to consumers. Brown replies that he wants the banks to pass on rate cuts.
12.17pm: Nick Clegg says that the central policy of Barack Obama was to cut taxes for the low-paid, funded by the wealthy. When can Britain have the same? Brown says Obama did not fight the election on £20bn of spending cuts (the LibDem policy).
12.15pm: On the day America voted for change, says Cameron, how long will the British people have to put up with more of the same? Americans, retorts the PM, voted for progressive politics - including a fiscal stimulus, tax credits, regulation of pensions and tax credits - all opposed by the Conservatives.
12.13pm: The only change the Tories represent, says Brown, is a change of policy every week.
12.10pm: Brown laughs at Cameron quoting the EU. Lists other nations that are in recession. Says total overall debt isn't as bad as David Cameron suggests.
12.05pm: David Cameron joins the congratulations to Barack Obama and congratulates John McCain on his campaign, too. America is a beacon of hope, opportunity and change says David Cameron. Did the PM tell the President-Elect that this was no time for a novice? Brown gets up to interrupt. "You" voted for no change when you bottled the election, he continues, pointing that the Labour benches. He then asks a question about the recession and why Britain is so badly prepared for it. Our recession is forecast to be deeper, he says, quoting EU analysis - beating only Estonia and Latvia. Two countries that escaped the grip of Stalin. We're still in it.
12.02pm: Loud cheers as Brown welcomes Barack Obama's election and looks forward to a continuing close relationship between Britain and America.
Brown confuses his dullness with seriousness again.
Posted by: Norm Brainer | November 05, 2008 at 12:09
Love Brown's denial sometimes. EU says we are the worst prepared to deal with the recession - Brown: "we are best prepared to deal with the recession."
Posted by: David (One of many) | November 05, 2008 at 12:09
I know Cameron is young and inexperienced but he should know the rules of the House by now.
I wish he'd show some respect for tradition - he's supposed to be a conservative!
Posted by: Nigel Rathbone | November 05, 2008 at 12:15
Nigel, perhaps if Brown followed the tradition of answering questions...?
Posted by: David (One of many) | November 05, 2008 at 12:17
I expect that the usual suspects will be along here shortly to say that Cameron was the one sounding incoherant and a bit flustered with a quivering voice like Brown was today.
Posted by: Norm Brainer | November 05, 2008 at 12:20
David (One of many), I've been following PMQs since the days of Harold Wilson, and I can assure you there is NO tradition (from PMs of either party) of answering the question.
Posted by: Nigel Rathbone | November 05, 2008 at 12:23
"Done our best" to support the military? LIE! Or you really are incompetent.
Posted by: Richard Lowe | November 05, 2008 at 12:27
Not true at all Nigel Rathbone. John Major even when he was at his lowest ebb answered questions more honestly and openly than Blair or Brown.
Blair evaded questions with some skill, Brown just evades them. He wouldn't get away with it if we had a decent speaker.
Posted by: Malcolm Dunn | November 05, 2008 at 12:31
The way Brown evades answering almost every question posed by an opposition is starting to get ridiculous. The responses he gave to Jenkins and Clegg were a joke.
As for Nigel's statement that this embodies no change from the practice of previous PM's: yes but Labour was elected so many years ago now (100?) on the basis that things would get better, not "we'll do the same old thing that past govts used to do". Have they now given up all pretence at better governance now then?
Posted by: Not an Economist | November 05, 2008 at 12:34
I know Cameron is young and inexperienced but he should know the rules of the House by now.
I wish he'd show some respect for tradition - he's supposed to be a conservative!
Posted by: Nigel Rathbone | November 05, 2008 at 12:15
Conservative you must be joking , if anyone needs a change it,s us . Cameron is anything but a Conservative.
Posted by: gezmond007 | November 05, 2008 at 12:34
Well we have the reason why Conservative MP's don't challenge Brown's claim that debt is 37% of GDP, for as Cameron failed to challenge it the Conservative leadership doesn't know it!
Posted by: Iain | November 05, 2008 at 12:34
I know Cameron is young and inexperienced but he should know the rules of the House by now.
I wish he'd show some respect for tradition - he's supposed to be a conservative
What did he do wrong?
It is not clear from the commentary.
Posted by: NigelC | November 05, 2008 at 12:34
Malcolm, to be fair Major probably came closest of all recent PMs (from Wilson to Brown) in attempting to answer the questions in PMQs (but then he was generally pretty useless at all other aspects of the job). Conversely, Thatcher was one of the worst offenders, typically responding to Neil Kinnock with a scathing put-down rather than even pretending to answer the question.
PMQs is nothing more than a forum for point scoring.
Posted by: Nigel Rathbone | November 05, 2008 at 12:38
I am not sure it is wise for Cameron to tie himself to the Barry-Barack-Obama bandwagon. Obama is left of centre afterall and his Decomcrat allies in the Senate are keen to promote a further stimulus package that will further increase public sector debt in America an so puish that nation closer and closer to bankruptcy. As far as I know Cameron does not support such a stance - witness his recent comments about our govt not being able to spend its way out of recession. He is leabving himself open to the type of slap down Brown delivered in this PMQ's (12:15 pm above).
Posted by: not an economist | November 05, 2008 at 12:40
Conservative you must be joking , if anyone needs a change it,s us . Cameron is anything but a Conservative.
Yes, labour, and Britain in general (which 'us' do you mean?) needs a change and I would say that Cameron will be a good thing to change to however you want to classify him.
Posted by: Norm Brainer | November 05, 2008 at 12:41
Sorry ... using the wrong tag for quotes
Posted by: Norm Brainer | November 05, 2008 at 12:41
Norm, I wouldn't worry about gezmond007. He's a Labour supporter/Draper troll who pretends to be a concerned Tory.
Posted by: David (One of many) | November 05, 2008 at 12:52
The only change Brown represents is short-change.
The 'novice' line was too good to pass up but it does somewhat now tie Cameron's chances to how Obama performs before the UK GE.
Anyway, happy Guy Fawkes day. :-)
Posted by: GB£.com (34% of Tories disagree) | November 05, 2008 at 12:57
The trouble with Obama, like Clinton before him is that he will spend and spend some more.
Unless he is willing to bite the bullet of higher taxation for all Americans, he will likely leave their economy weaker in the long run. Already it is clear that his policy's will hurt the small business's that are the backbone of the US economy by forcing them to pay for health reforms. America is a messed up capitalism already on it knees. It will take radical surgery to cure the patient. Its a good thing that America has elected a black American (even if he is not all that black according to Jackson)it is not such a good thing that the Americans have elected a left leaning democrat. A day for American pride perhaps but we all know pride comes before a fall.
Posted by: The Bishop Swine | November 05, 2008 at 13:26
Cameron's "change" is a return to Heathite EUphilia, dirigisme, high state spending, green taxes and nanny statism. No thanks!
Posted by: Libertarian | November 05, 2008 at 13:41
Nigel Rathbone
Thank you for another lesson, but I think that you will find that most people who blog on a political website tend to know as much as you do about.........politics.
Posted by: London Tory | November 05, 2008 at 13:52
Dave ( one of many ) I am not a draper troll or a Labour supporter. People like you are the reason the Tory party got into such a state.
Anybody who does not conform to everything that is put out by Cameron is a troll .
I do hope people like you are not "one of many".
Posted by: gezmond007 | November 05, 2008 at 13:59
London Tory, I wish that were so, but sadly it appears not to be the case.
People who blindly support a particular party (be it Tory or Labour, Republican or Democrat) have an amazing tendency to (a) ignore or forget history when it does not fit in with their view of the world, and (b) argue a political case because their party supports it, even though they'd be ripping it apart if the other side were proposing it.
I don't like hypocrisy, so I point this out on here - and get lambasted for it. (I would do the same on Labourhome, but it's a very dull site in comparison, the debates here are much more interesting.)
Posted by: Nigel Rathbone | November 05, 2008 at 14:16
*yawn*
Not fooling me, Gezmond.
Posted by: David (One of many) | November 05, 2008 at 14:21
Not trying to Dave.
Posted by: gezmond007 | November 05, 2008 at 14:27
gezmond007 - "...the reason the Tory party got into such a state."
What do you mean? Successful?! It isn't really in that much of a state, if we're honest, is it?!
How comical!
In any case, Cameron isn't in reality going to be tied to Obama's domestic game plan. Whether or not Obama is a success at home will contribute little to his international reputation, so I think we have little to lose.
Posted by: Andy | November 05, 2008 at 14:36
"I am not sure it is wise for Cameron to tie himself to the Barry-Barack-Obama bandwagon. Obama is left of centre afterall."
No matter what Obama's stances are, the simple message we have had from the USA is a strong expression of the desire for change, something which hopefully will be repeated here.
Posted by: Votedave | November 05, 2008 at 14:51
Gezmond: " I am not a draper troll or a Labour supporter."
Yeah, I know you have to deny it and not all those who disagree with Cameron are trolls, but you are though, aren't you.
Posted by: Norm Brainer | November 05, 2008 at 14:59
Norm Brainer: The constant accusation that other people are trolls is at least as annoying as trolling.
Posted by: Tim Montgomerie | November 05, 2008 at 15:02
PERSONAL ABUSE OVERWRITTEN.
Posted by: gezmond007 | November 05, 2008 at 15:10
gezmond007 - "...the reason the Tory party got into such a state."
What do you mean? Successful?! It isn't really in that much of a state, if we're honest, is it?!
How comical!
In any case, Cameron isn't in reality going to be tied to Obama's domestic game plan. Whether or not Obama is a success at home will contribute little to his international reputation, so I think we have little to lose.
Posted by: Andy | November 05, 2008 at 14:36
Sorry Andy I meant in the past ( 1990,s )
Posted by: gezmond007 | November 05, 2008 at 15:13
Since when did David Cameron become a flagflyer for Barack Obama? Whatever happened to the resounding support for John McCain 'The next US president' that we saw at the last conference but one? I support David Cameron but I don't like these double standards. This is dishonest, opportunist politics and I don't like it!
Posted by: Tony Makara | November 05, 2008 at 15:17
Tony M ' I support David Cameron but I don't like these double standards. This is dishonest, opportunist politics and I don't like it!
its called NU_CON!
Posted by: Mapa | November 05, 2008 at 15:26
Tony, with respect, I don't think that's what he's doing. I think it's important that Cameron take every opportunity to throw Brown's 'novice' nonsense back at him. Beyond that, he didn't praise Obama in any significant way. I believe that Cameron is closer politically to McCain, but in terms of what both he and Obama embody it is important to note the similarities. If he didn't speak up we'd be left in the odd situation of watching Brown try to tan himself in Obama's reflected glow while neither supporting his candidacy nor reflecting his obvious 'change' mantra.
Posted by: David (One of many) | November 05, 2008 at 15:32
"On the day America voted for change" says Cameron
Didn't David Cameron want John McCain to win and thereby 'No change'? There isan important point of principle here, namely that David Cameron is trying to pass himself off as being 'for Obama' when that wasn't the case at all. Does anyone else think this is dishonest?
Posted by: Tony Makara | November 05, 2008 at 15:38
To be fair there were people in the party who had sympathies with both sides in the US. Obama was new and fresh, emerging above Clinton as the candidate and has offered change to America. Many people I have spoken to in recent months have been drawn to Obama. He may not be perfect, he may not be as good as some hope, indeed his biggest problem is going to be dealing with raised expectations, however he will offer a new direction and our country, across parties, will be working with him.
Posted by: Matt Wright | November 05, 2008 at 15:39
David (One of many, of course Brown's remarks about 'novices' were idiotic and I don't want to defend Brown at all! Nontheless I like to see consistency in politicians and it galls me to see Obama's win being used by David Cameron when Mr Cameron supported John McCain and no change.
Posted by: Tony Makara | November 05, 2008 at 15:41
Tony, fair enough. I think it's a bit shifty myself, but then I also think sometimes a bit of political opportunism is needed - particularly when dealing with Brown. I certainly see your point, though.
Posted by: David (One of many) | November 05, 2008 at 15:49
Not long to go now before Kilts are compulsory in the McCommons.
http://img147.imageshack.us/img147/3020/mclabourscommonsjr3.jpg
Posted by: Steve | November 05, 2008 at 15:49
Tony M, I don't think David Cameron is endorsing barack Obama's policies. Notwithstanding that, there is definitely a mood for change across the USA, as there is here - and that is what David Cameron is quite rightly trying to highlight - even though he did back McCain.
Incidentally, I thought John McCain was very gracious in defeat and deserves the utmost respect for fighting for his country with honour.
Posted by: Votedave | November 05, 2008 at 16:16
Please Steve, stop posting these anti-Scottish comments. There are Conservatives up there working hard who need your support.
Posted by: Votedave | November 05, 2008 at 16:19
Tony M, I suppose you could also say about John McCain that he claimed that he himself would have been a change, and was not another George Bush.
Posted by: Votedave | November 05, 2008 at 16:24
Our Party should run a mile if the Republicans start a 'Palin for 2012' bandwagon.
Historical ties are one thing, being associated with crass stupidity is quite another.
Posted by: London Tory | November 05, 2008 at 16:31
VoteDave, the suggestion that the American people had called for 'change' at a time when David Cameron clearly supported the 'no change' candidate could easily have backfired on David Cameron if Gordon Brown had been a bit quicker on the trigger.
Of course David Cameron should welcome the new president, but he has to be careful he doesn't give Brown an opportunity to point out that he was on the wrong side of change by supporting McCain.
My main concern is that I don't want to see Gordon Brown score points off David Cameron, as well as I'd like politicians to be more consistent. The attempt to welcome change in the States while at the same time backing the no change candidate was a dangerous attempt to walk on ice. Sometimes trying to steal that extra point isn't worth the risk.
Posted by: Tony Makara | November 05, 2008 at 16:36
On and on it goes. Trolls goad, twits get wound up. WE NEED CHANGE. The way to get it is to support DC and The Team with the fervour and passion of Mcain's and Barak's supporters. Loyalty and dogged support is caled for. The carping and dissent can be left when in Government and when or if deserved. None of this means blind adherence to all that is said and done in Conservatives names but it is essential to show discipline here as everywhere else. Just like Labour supporters did but without dumping morality and decency along the way, like Bliar and now Brown have done.
Posted by: M Dowding | November 05, 2008 at 16:36
VoteDave, I saw nothing to convince me that John McCain offered anything fresh. I'd have prefered to see Mitt Romney taking the fight to Obama, he would have been especially strong on economic matters and Romney has expressed concern about jobs being shipped overseas and the unchecked growth of China. I feel McCain and Palin were the wrong choice entirely.
Posted by: Tony Makara | November 05, 2008 at 16:40
Politics Home think that Brown won today....
http://www.politicshome.com/#4329
Posted by: Hugh | November 05, 2008 at 16:42
Politics Home think that Brown won today....
http://www.politicshome.com/#4329
Posted by: Hugh | November 05, 2008 at 16:42
Rawnsley is a wannabee brownite, end of story!!
Posted by: M Dowding | November 05, 2008 at 16:43
The ideas of the present-day Republican Party are a long, long way removed from any that I, a life-long Conservative, could support.
It is the era, I hope, for pragmatic politics, dealing with matters by priority, with integrity and without ideological preconceptions. There is no political vein which will have the answer to all possible contingencies.
Political leaders must learn to adapt or die.
Posted by: Victor, NW Kent | November 05, 2008 at 16:44
I saw PMQ and gave Brown the edge, especially on the economy. I think Brown glibbed it but Cameron and Osbourne did not come back effectively. They seem to be like rabbits in headlights. Brown is getting away too easily. The Tory from North Essex had the best impact.
Posted by: snegchui | November 05, 2008 at 17:18
I saw PMQ and gave Brown the edge, especially on the economy.
snegchui, because yet again the Conservatives failed to rubbish Brown's claim that debt to GDP was 37%, a claim Brown made again in PMQ's and yet again Cameron failed to savage him on it!
Posted by: Iain | November 05, 2008 at 17:25
Well, I can assure you that the Obama Administration will do everything in its power to re-elect Labour, so Mr. Cameron may come to regret this particular performance.
Posted by: Goldie | November 05, 2008 at 22:21
The conservative party is not fit for purpose. I hope they lose. I will do my best to help that happen until the conservative party is run by conservatives.
Posted by: Peter | November 06, 2008 at 03:27
I see Nick Clegg couldn't (yet again) resist having a dig at the Conservativesm although I noticed while he was speaking, David Cameron was studiously ignoring him - probably for the best!
Posted by: Matt | November 06, 2008 at 11:39
To Peter - I am guessing when you say "conservative", you mean hang 'em, flog 'em, homophobic, narrow mindedness - exactly the sort of policies which have led to the party being out of power for the last 11 years. The world has changed, however some people have not.
Posted by: Matt | November 06, 2008 at 11:41