PMQS (2)

Following on from my post yesterday, regarding the lack of relevance of PMQs my point is wonderfully illustrated by the picture above showing MP Michael Fabricant donning what the Telegraph calls “a magnificent moustache” during yesterday's session.

Despite long ceasing to function as such, PMQs is supposed to act as a check on the executive by MPs, Fabricant's actions couldn't more clearly show the function's absence and in addition demonstrate the contempt held by MPS on how the process should work. Paliament's failures laid bare.

Thus one is inclined to agree, albeit reluctantly, with the sentiments of former Labour party member Dan Hodges when he dismisses PMQs as a joke which makes a laughing stock of our nation:

Perhaps it was the sight of Michael Fabricant sitting on the back benches wearing a giant fake moustache. Or the Prime Minister’s joke about Ed Miliband “loving Engels instead”, a reference to Miliband’s Desert Island discs choice of Robbie Williams song “Angels”, which contains the line “I’m loving angels instead”. Or the fact Labour’s leader didn’t have the wit or wisdom to inflict the mercy killing the pun so richly deserved, and instead spent his own time at the Dispatch Box rambling aimlessly from one issue to another.

Anyway, whatever it was, as I sat there delivering my instant Twitter verdict – “Appalling joke aside, Cameron skated through this one. Ed's PMQ's strategy seems to be to meander from one issue to another. Weird” – I suddenly thought “what is the point?” Not just “what is the point of me sending this tweet?” which would have been a legitimate thought in itself, but: “what is the point of PMQs?” 

And:

What precisely do we conduct PMQs for? It’s certainly not for the benefit of the electorate, who think the whole thing is a farce. In fact, this is one of the problems.

Yet while Hodges identifies a failure in the system he is unable to put forward a suitable solution, blinkered by the Westminister Village as he is, he sticks with the status quo:

If we want scrutiny of the executive we can have it without the festival of banality that is PMQs. John Bercow has shown himself only too willing to drag ministers, from the PM down, to the chamber to deliver statements to the House on the important issues of the day. They give the opportunity for the government to set out their case in depth, for the opposition to conduct a detailed and forensic analysis of Minister’s responses, and for backbenchers of all sides to have their say free from the rabble-rousing that in unleashed at noon every Wednesday.

But as we see on a daily basis the status quo doesn't work either. Parliament has long ceased scrutinising the executive; a mixture of conflicting interests between MPs' representing constituents interests but wanting promotion, that Parliament no longer makes a lot of our laws and the lack of power of constituents to hold their MPs to account.

We need something different, we need the six demands.

Dead Pensioners

I now rarely watch PMQs, its relevance about as important as Parliament itself. But my attention was brought to the following exchange between Cameron and Miliband today:

Edward Miliband: Here is the reality. This is not a minor policy adjustment—it is an intellectual collapse of the Government’s position. For two months, they have been saying that if we take action to intervene in markets it is back to the ’70s—it is Marxism—but now they realise that they are on the wrong side of public opinion. That is the reality. The Prime Minister must realise the gravity of the situation, as figures this week show that there were 31,000 deaths as a result of the cold winter, with about 10,000 as the result of cold homes. Can he explain how things will be better this winter than they were last?

The Prime Minister: What there will be this winter—and this is a vitally important issue—are the cold weather payments that we have doubled from their previous level. The winter fuel payment will be in place, as will the warm home discount, which helps 2 million people in our country. Last year’s increase in the pension of £5.30 a week will be in place. Every excess death in the winter is a tragedy, and there were 31,000 last year. The right hon. Gentleman might care to recall that when he was energy Secretary there were 36,500.

Edward Miliband: I asked the Prime Minister a very specific question: how are things going to be better this winter than last? The reality is that prices will be higher this winter than last. For the average household, the British Gas bill went up £123 this week. It was also revealed that the profits of the energy companies were up 75% in the last year alone. Why, under his Government, is it acceptable for the British people to pay exorbitant prices to fund exorbitant profits?

The Prime Minister: What is intellectual incoherence is not to address the fact that there were 36,500 winter deaths when the right hon. Gentleman was standing here as energy Secretary. That number was lower last year. What is intellectually incoherent is to promise a price freeze for 20 months’ time when we do not control the global price of gas—that is completely incoherent and a total con.

With all three parties agreeing largely to the same expensive energy policy, PMQs is reduced to two men bickering over who has killed the fewest number of people. Shameful doesn't even begin to describe it...

Deluded...

...and supremely arrogant. Cameron's Prime Minster's Questions answer today speaks for itself:

I do not think it would be right for Britain to have an in/out referendum today, because we would be giving the British people a false choice. Millions of people in this country, myself included, want Britain to stay in the European Union, but they believe that there are chances to negotiate a better relationship. Throughout Europe, countries are looking at forthcoming treaty change and thinking, “What can I do to maximise my national interest?” That is what the Germans will do. That is what the Spanish will do. That is what the British should do.

This following that one of the proposals of "Fresh Start" to repatriate powers should include;

The abolition of the Strasbourg seat of the European Parliament, the Economic and Social Committee, and the Committee of the Regions.

In the face of such stupidity I'm not sure what else to say...

Bubble, Bubble

I've long since stopped watching PMQs regularly. A charade and a farce it most definitely is, not least because it has ever-increasingly retreated into non-relevance.

And so it proves again today. A cursory look at any order paper for Parliament will reveal meaningless debates on topics that are no longer decided here. Now Parliament's impotency has infected the 'highlight of the week' - PMQs. Today there were lots of questions about the Leveson enquiry, yet none about the Eurozone and its possible devastating impact on the UK, nor the economy nor about Syria or nor any other serious subject.

Andrew Neil sums up the frustration from viewers here on today's Daily Politics show:



Serious politics has AWOL

EU Employment Law

Snuck into PMQs today is Cameron briefly mentioning "EU regulations" regarding employment law (along with the misuse of the term 'less' instead of 'fewer') about 2mins in:
 


Unsurprisingly though the rest of PMQ's between Cameron and Milliband is a fake dust up over laws they no longer have control over.

Still at least the whole charade keeps some (paid) people happy.

Calm Down Dear

A wonderful display of Cameron's disdain towards Parliamentary procedure today during PMQs. In response to a question from Tory MP Brian Binley, Cameron replies (my emphasis):

The honourable gentleman is right... (3:20 mins in)

Gentleman? It's a question from an MP from his own party, surely Cameron should say 'my honourable friend'? Thankfully Hansard tidies up the mistake for him:

The Prime Minister: My hon. Friend is right about the figures today and that what is happening in the construction industry is disappointing

Given that Cameron is not a real Tory, one has to wonder if it was a Freudian slip.

Rubbish

Tory MP Nadine Dorries asked early on in today's PMQs this question:

Nadine Dorries (Mid Bedfordshire) (Con): The American waste giant, Covanta, is proposing to build in my constituency an incinerator about the size of Wembley. Will the Prime Minister give an assurance that decisions about such matters will be made at a local level in future?

The Prime Minister: My hon. Friend is right to raise this, and it is right that decisions should be made locally. We want to make sure that all the latest technology for alternatives to incineration is considered, so that we can make sure that we are using the best ways to achieve a green approach.

Decided at a local level eh? Hmm I wonder what's missing from the question and the answer? It's not being decided at all at a local level because the councils are forced to reduce landfill by EU unaccountable bureaucrats and fines.

Building an incinerator is an issue that has plagued my local area, and one where the EU dimension gets ignored again.

Another example of the lack of candidness by our so-called elected representatives.

PMQs: The Don't Mention The EU Edition

Iain Dale was impressed by Cameron's performance yesterday at PMQs. Well he certainly comes across as more assured and human than Brown, but that's not exactly difficult. Other than that, the substance hasn't changed much since the election. As an example, here's a question from Tory backbencher, Karen Bradley:

Is the Prime Minister aware of the case of my constituent Mr Edmond Arapi, who is facing extradition to Italy, having been tried in his absence? Will my right hon. Friend look into the matter urgently and accelerate the review of extradition cases before Mr Arapi is taken from his family and sent to an Italian jail?

And Cameron's response?

I am happy to look at this case, and I will discuss it with my right hon. Friend the Home Secretary, who is working on the issue of deportations. Legal processes have to be followed, but I will discuss this with my right hon. Friend, and perhaps then contact my hon. Friend.

Now if Cameron were to give a more honest response it would go something like this:

There's no point looking at this case, because Mr Edmond Arapi has been fast tracked by the European Arrest Warrant so there's nothing we can do. All of us in this House agree with the EU, so I'm afraid you will need to go back to Mr Edmond Arapi and tell him, even though he's innocent, tough get packing!

And so it continues, Conservative Philip Hollobone:

What will my right hon. Friend be doing to ensure that foreign nationals engaged in terrorist-related activity in this country will be deported back to their country of origin when their evil plots are detected?

Cameron:

I really am grateful to my hon. Friend for raising that question. When foreign nationals threaten our country but we do not have the evidence necessary to prosecute them, it is essential for us to be able to deport them back to their country of origin. I have asked the Home Secretary to work with the Foreign Secretary to draw up agreements with as many countries as possible, so that we can deport those people and keep our country safe. All diplomatic efforts, including efforts by me, will be made to ensure that we keep our country safe.

One small problem:

Two men who plotted to kill thousands of Britons in a terrorist atrocity cannot be deported because it would infringe their human rights, a court ruled yesterday.

And:

Up to 3,000 foreign criminals will be released from prison on to Britain's streets without any attempt to deport them, Government papers have revealed.

It pins the blame on an EU directive which rules that committing a serious crime is no longer sufficient grounds for removal.

Neither is the Government's desire to deter other foreign nationals from committing a crime in this country.

As a result, the vast bulk of the estimated 3,300 European criminals released from British jails each year - including burglars, thieves and muggers - will simply walk free.

More confirmation that the last election was simply an exercise in rearranging deckchairs on the Titanic

Quote Of The Day

"Any closer and they'll start kissing".

David Cameron's jibe at Brown and Darling in PMQs today, after Darling's extraordinary interview yesterday.

Amusingly, just after Cameron said this the camera cut straight to Brown looking 'longingly' at Darling with lips puckered. You can watch it here 9.20mins in.

Bullying...

With all the stories of Gordon Brown's alleged bullying swirling around in the last few days I thought a revisit to PMQs from May 2009 might be in order:

Prime Minister's Questions

Although I'm an avid watcher of PMQs, it is not my intention to regularly blog about it or give a 'scores on the doors'. Other blogs are much better at it than me.

PMQs is generally a bit of knock-about fun which, depending on how it's reported, is only useful to gauge the political weather: today Brown looked confident, Cameron less so, - partly I would guess, because the Tories have recently declined in the polls since 'cast-iron' Dave's about-turn on the Lisbon Treaty.

My reason for blogging about PMQs today though, is that there is one small detail that irks me no end (and that's an understatement), which was demonstrated again.

Week after week (sadly with few exceptions) Brown leads with tributes to British fallen soldiers. This rightly was heard in respectful silence. Then usually follows a planted Labour question after which is Cameron's turn. He begins with a tribute also and this was again heard in silence.

However...

When Nick Clegg (Lib Dem Leader) rises, jeering starts. Clegg is clearly held in contempt by other MPs and often looks hopelessly out of his depth, and so this is understandable knock-about fun.

But it is obvious that Clegg will begin with his own tribute, as the leader of the third main party, so it should be heard in silence from the start. It was not. The jeering did subside eventually, amid audible sustained sounds of 'shh' by other MPs, but rarely are Clegg's tributes heard in complete silence.

It is a small detail but one that for me speaks volumes about the MP's real priorities.