You are here: Home » Comment »

Ed Miliband doesn’t have a PMQs problem

December 15, 2011 12:27 pm

Author:

Sunny Hundal

Tags:

Share this Article

Before David Cameron became Prime Minister he said that PMQs were too much of a Punch and Judy show, and vowed to change all that. Now he’s reduced to making jokes about Ed Miliband’s brother in order to get himself out of tricky questions.

Can anyone imagine the President of the United States behaving that way? I didn’t think so either. We seem to be unique in having a press that celebrates playground-behaviour at the hallowed institutions of democracy.

But complaining about it isn’t enough; how should Ed Miliband deal with the issue? Yesterday Mark Ferguson said Ed should cut the gags. I think that’s a fair point, but I’d go further.

The problem is broader: PMQs has become the main barometer by which the political class can judge the effectiveness of an opposition leader. And if Ed Miliband is to succeed in changing how the Labour Party interacts with voters across the country, PMQs are entirely the worse place to start from.

This is not to say that he is only focusing on PMQs, but the PLP feels too focused on influencing the Westminster class. This inevitably prompts some hysterical worrying when the usual suspects do their thing.

It’s worth noting that a year after Cameron became leader, he also faced a barrage of attacks from people from his own party. The press was full of open speculation that he would be replaced by the new year; briefings were coming at him from across the party. In contrast, Ed Miliband is leading a far more disciplined and cohesive party, with ‘Labour Insider’ briefings only coming from the usual minority.

But put that aside for now. The task for Ed Miliband shouldn’t be to come up with better gags at PMQs but to shift focus away from PMQs entirely and drive the agenda in other ways.

No one except the Westminster press pays attention to PMQs. It has zero impact on how people perceive a leader. The reason why Tony Blair and Gordon Brown lost voters isn’t because they did badly at PMQs, but because people stopped trusting their party.

There is a danger that Ed Miliband’s team follows the Gordon Brown script: trying to deal with pressure by making a series of speeches and announcements that are designed to appeal to the Westminster press, but do little to shift the culture of the party and make it more accessible to ordinary people across the country.

The Labour party is brimming with ideas, full of intelligent people and dedicated people. A focus on Westminster fails to engage those opportunities because, by its nature, that remains a highly centralised affair.

Instead of trying to feed a monster that relies on conflict and intrigue to drive the agenda, Ed Miliband needs to look more outwards. PMQS should be the least of his concerns

http://twitter.com/kulgancrydee Kulgan of Crydee

Ed Miliband leads a united & far more disciplined party! Anyone can see that the Labour has its own problems with divisions within the party. If people on the outside can see divisions, what divisions are there that they can’t see.

I do have to agree though that PMQs is the least of Ed Milibands problems. Looking at the polls regarding his leadership of the party, the majority of Labour’s own voters have issues with it.

PMQs is really the only time we the public, see the leaders head-to-head. That is what the public are left with to ponder over the Christmas Break. Ed Miliband was completely battered by David Cameron at PMQs this week.

Ed Miliband needs to stick to his strengths whatever David Cameron hurls at him. He can’t tell jokes especially scripted ones. The saying goes that the ‘Devil is in the detail’ and apparently that is one of Ed Miliband’s strengths. He cannot beat David Cameron on style and wit so he should not try.

He needs to become an effective leader. In a successful democracy the opposition needs to be effective. So far under Ed Miliband’s leadership it has not yet happened.

It is not helped by Labour politicians coming out with ‘Clear win for Ed M @ PMQs’ when even my dogs could tell he was blown out of the water. Politicians should tell the truth. We the public will respect them more for it instead of just laughing at their clearly tribal tweets/comments.
- http://www.pickledpolitics.com Sunny H
  
  “PMQs is really the only time we the public, see the leaders head-to-head. ”
  
  Really? throwing cheap gags at each other is your idea of meaningful and useful politics? Somehow I don’t think that goes for most people – who are more worried about jobs than ‘Your Brotha!’ jokes
  
  “It is not helped by Labour politicians coming out with ‘Clear win for Ed M @ PMQs’”
  
  I think its a silly idea to even rate ‘who won’ at PMQs. No one in the wider country gives a shit.
  - No
    
    “I think its a silly idea to even rate ‘who won’ at PMQs. No one in the wider country gives a shit. ”
    
    Yet you devote a whole article to arguing that there is no PMQ problem.; surely there would be no need if no one cared?
Carl

“The Labour party is brimming with ideas, full of intelligent people and dedicated people.”

I’m sure this is true, but you must know that this is not how they’re coming across at all — rather, they’re coming across as indecisive and without solutions to the main problems of the day. Labour’s perceived weakness is surely one of the main reasons that the Tories have remained so resilient in the polls.

A major improvement in PR is required. (And I say this all as a supporter.)
Hugh

“It’s worth noting that a year after Cameron became leader, he also faced
a barrage of attacks from people from his own party. The press was full
of open speculation that he would be replaced by the new year”

Cameron was elected December 2005. In Dec 06 the Guardian was reporting: “David Cameron has led his party to its strongest sustained position in
14 years according to a Guardian/ICM poll published today”

Meanwhile Conservative Home polling found 67% of Conservative party members satisfied with his performance. Editor’s comment: “Even amongst
the dissatisfied I sense little appetite for a change of leadership. What members are doing through a survey like this is registering a
protest at the direction of the party and the leadership’s unwillingness
to talk about the range of issues that worry the public.”

Which papers were speculating there would be a new leader in the New Year? It would be amusing to know.

Cameron was in a very much stronger position than Miliband.
- http://pulse.yahoo.com/_MCHMWHXOWHZGAMD2YHT36LW2LY Alan Giles
  
  Hugh, I seem to remember the likes of Norman Tebbitt, David Davis and the usual suspects making barbs at Cameron’s leadership in the early days “he’s got to do this” and “go to” to do that to appease his voters.
  
  EDd Miliband is castigated by similar malcontents in Labour because he is not Blair or his brother David, in much the same way John Major was castigated for not being Mrs Thatcher.
  
  If the David Miliband/Blair supporters (like Paul Richards here and John Rentoul at every opportunity in the IoS) , had as much sense as they like to lead others to believe they have, they would remember the lessons after Mrs Thatcher and shut up. The Tories were out of power for eighteen years because each new leader was compared to Mrs Thatcher and found wanting (granted Duncan-Smith must have been the biggest joke of all time – he still is). If the DM/TB supporters really cared about their party, not to mention the disadvantaged in society, they would stop the petulance, because the public perceive a divided party as a losing party.
  
  It is rather sad that David Blunkett, Lord Mandy and Alan Milburn etc can’t accept their fifteen minutes of fame is now over , they are the “Labour” equivalent of poor old Tebbitt – yesterday’s men and embittered because they are of no account any more.
  - Hugh
    
    A few key differences: Cameron’s election was actually supported by party members and MPs; he improved the party’s polling rather than hampered it; and by early 2007 had established a 13 point lead over a Labour party led by Brown.
    
    http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/2007/feb/20/uk.polls
    
    To put it another way, there wasn’t any real feeling a year after his election that the Tories would be better off without him; I don’t think the same is true for Miliband.
    
    The lesson from the Tories’ past you draw is also unconvincing: they were largely united behind Howard – and still lost. In fact, the obvious lesson is more recent: in Brown, where the same arguments you’re using about the need for a united front were continually and ineffectually deployed right up until he lost.
http://twitter.com/matt_j_little Matthew Little

You’re forgetting Sunny that Blair won those voters over in the first place. I’m yet to see any evidence in the polling that would suggest Ed Miliband is a vote winner. Therein lies the problem…
- Anonymous
  
  Then again millions moved away from Blair’s Labour over his three wins, so I suppose we are where we are.
- Vol2011
  
  Blair didn’t win the voters over. John Smith did – in part by hammering John Major at PMQs on a regular basis.
- http://www.pickledpolitics.com Sunny H
  
  “I’m yet to see any evidence in the polling that would suggest Ed Miliband is a vote winner.”
  
  Labour vote in May 2010: 29%. Current polling: 39-42%. End of discussion
  - Hugh
    
    I can see why you’d want to end it but speaking of polls, YouGov recently found 36% of people think that the party would have been better off with David
    Miliband, including 45% of Labour supporters. Only 6% think the party
    would have been worse off with David Miliband, 35% think it would be no
    different.
    
    Asked who the best leader of the Labour party would be, 30%
    of people pick David Miliband to a 9% for Ed Miliband.
    
    That was last month; I don’t reckon things have improved this week.
    
    If the polling suggests the party would be doing better with a different leader, it suggests he’s not a vote-winner, surely?
    
    Current polling is 38-40%, incidentally.
    - http://www.facebook.com/people/Mike-Homfray/510980099 Mike Homfray
      
      Yes, but what would the party be saying? I think it would be the vacuous slogans of the Purple book and Progress. That’s not a Labour party worth having at all
      - Hugh
        
        Whereas you’ve got the vacuous slogans of Ed. I can’t think of a scenario under which Labour could have fewer identifiable policies or less strategic direction.
  - Anonymous
    
    Real labour for you end of discussion, how about the Tories are in power with the liberals and Labour are in opposition end of discussion
- http://www.facebook.com/people/Mike-Homfray/510980099 Mike Homfray
  
  For one election only, and they weren’t required for a working majority. They aren’t coming back, so live with it. I know it means that Labour might even look and sound like Labour in consequence which you may find hard to handle.
  - Anonymous
    
    Well if you think Miliband sounds like Labour carry on he sounds more like a smaller version of Blair and Brown to me.
GuyM

PMQs is the only prime time head to head between PM and PM in waiting the UK public gets to see.

Prior to the 2010 election the public repeatedly said it wanted PM debates, because they wanted to see a head to head debate.

PMQs is their only option between elections, it is political debate at its most intense and it gets carried on major news channels. As a result it seeps into the public sub-concious. Back benchers pick up on the mood. Media political commentators discuss at length the poor performance. Questions as to whether a leader is “prime minister material” will start cropping up more and more often.

I’d suggest that if Milliband spends the next 3 years getting as badly mauled as he was on Wednesday it will see a percentage or two taken away from the Labour vote in 2015. If you don’t agree that is important then I’m sure the Tories will be very happy.

Will Wednesday on it own make much difference? Probably not, although the feelings will linger over the break, the point is repeated Wednesdays like this weeks one will build a narrative that you can not ignore or dismiss. It won’t stop 10% of the population voting for Milliband but it might stop 2% or so.
Steven Nash

“No one except the Westminster press pays attention to PMQs. It has zero impact on how people perceive a leader. The reason why Tony Blair and Gordon Brown lost voters isn’t because they did badly at PMQs, but because people stopped trusting their party.”

Every piece of communication contributes to an overall brand image. It’s quite bold to say it has ‘zero impact’, because I’d question how you measure it. Will people watch PMQs and decide to vote for Ed because of it? Almost certainly no. But week after week of convincing defeat contributes to a picture of a loser. People don’t like backing a loser.

Even when Ed has a decent line he fluffs it up completely. He struggles to communicate and this isn’t limited to PMQs, remember that wonderful video where Ed sounded like he was a robot stuck in an infinite loop? That was embarrassing. And don’t get me started on his ‘predators vs producers’ mess.

‘Ed speaks human’? I’ve been missold a Labour leader!
- Anonymous
  
  Like it or not Miliband does not come out great in front of a camera, he may be a nice bloke, he may be labours new face, fact is his TV persona is weak.
  - Steven Nash
    
    Yup. We’ve done all of this already, a Labour leader with chronic presentation issues.
    
    This blog post is well intentioned but it’s basically the same type of excuse we heard when Brown was leader.We may yearn for a day when TV doesn’t matter. We might want to dismiss Cameron as a ‘slick salesman’, and paint our man as the ‘serious man for serious times’ but it didn’t work with Brown and won’t work now.
    - Peter Dixon
      
      Yep I agree and I despair – some may not Like Milli 1, but it was refreshing to hear him speak on radio 4 this week. Sadly we have lost the next election already, and friends in Scotland tell me that the end of Labour is on the books there for precisely the same reasons.
http://www.facebook.com/TheGreenBenches Eoin Clarke

Good piece Sunny. All but the chattering classes ignore PMQs.
- Steven Nash
  
  Then it’s probably not worth him turning up for it. It’d be an improvement I suppose.
- GuyM
  
  I doubt that, the public pressure for a PM debate before the 2010 election and the media coverage with all the games about “I agree with Nick” indicates that for many people a straight forward head to head is likely the only political media they get to see.
  
  You think people ignore PMQs but watch policy announcements?
Anonymous

I agree with Sunny Hundal. I recall PMQs when William Hague was Leader of the Opposition. He had and still has a ready wit and PMQs with him and Tony Blair was often like watching a tag wrestling match between two evenly matched opponents.

BUT: William Hague was bald and so not photogenic. So every time PMQ was televised, the electorate were reminded of that and the fact he came over as a smarta###. And many of the Shadow Cabinet were former Ministers from the defeated Government and he had warmed over prior policies. So he appealed to voters like last night’s curry vomitted over the floor.

All you need to do with the above paragraph is remove the bald bit and substitute Ed Miliband and you’ll see the problems.

Apologies for the warmed up curry bit…
- Anonymous
  
  yes but Blair could put him down any time, the only time Hague was funny was at conference with his own, once in Parliament Blair destroyed him
alan.furniss

Milibland (either of them) are the best thing that ever happened to the Conservative party since Neil Kinnock
- Anonymous
  
  I tend to agree with you.
derek

It’s not just Ed, the whole front bench and majority of backbenchers are failing, I mean take the employment debate yesterday in HOC, Chris Grayling telling the opposition that their doing all they can to help people in to work?Er, like ending job start, VAT rise and the public sector cuts, seems to me their doing everything they can to make a bad situation worse and the opposition just accept it. I’d like to ask the labour machine, where is it written in tablets of stone that the conservatives approach is the only way?
Andrew

Haven’t you heard President Obama on TV – he makes those sort of cracks everytime he makes a speech!
http://twitter.com/JeevanJones Jeevan Jones

I think you raise an important point. At the moment, PMQs is almost a joke in that it is full of playground-like nonsense.

What PMQs needs to be is genuine scrutiny of the prime minister and the government. The British people, I think, want to see some coherent debate about policy between the major parties; PMQs just helps alienate voters from both sides of the Commons.

Definitely at the moment too much emphasis by the media is put on the theatrics of PMQs, when in actual fact it isn’t as momentous as is made out.
Guest

Sunny, this is a good post. I agree with what yourself and Mark suggest but I’d also make the following suggestions for Ed and Labour.

What seems obvious to me
is that Ed is trying to beat Cameron on his own terms. Ed is never going to
beat Cameron in a statesmanlike competition, so I would ask, why enter the
race? Ed’s response to Cameron’s bad jokes with his own slightly-worse bad
jokes yesterday was just another example of this. Team Ed need to do more to
portray him in contrast to Cameron- humble, polite, non-sexist and intelligent-
Ed’s strengths and conversely Cameron’s weaknesses.

Labour should also
recognise the difficulty in landing blows on the Prime Minister. David Cameron
is lucky in that he has a strong Cabinet which has allowed him to assume a more
presidential style. He is removed from the public’s ire because he is largely
detached from association with the policies that his government is pursuing. He
is more of a chairman than a chief executive- his Cabinet colleagues all have
their own agendas- Lansley’s NHS, IDS’s welfare reforms, Gove’s schools etc.- are
a key reason why Cameron has such high personal ratings. This strategy has
obviously made it very difficult for Ed to land blows. Obviously Ed shouldn’t
be doing all the punching, we also need to see the Shadow Cabinet attacking there
opposite number. Ed has a very strong team and he needs to make use of it,
specifically in areas where Labour are strong in respect to the Coalition- I’m
looking at you, Andy Burnham and Caroline Flint.

Labour also need to
recognise the context that any attack is being played out in. The political
avenues for expression during a time of austerity are limited- there is not
much you can do in terms of tax cuts or spending so we need to get dirty- we
need a master of the dark arts, skullduggery and the like. We need Peter
Mandelson.

In respect to PMQs in
particular, Cameron’s chairman style of governance while having benefits also
has drawbacks- we all know he has very little knowledge of the detail and Ed
needs to continue picking this up. Ed shouldn’t be looking to go toe-to-toe
with Cameron, he needs to be smarter and faster in his delivery of questions at
PMQs, that is when he does well.

Another distinct drawback
to Cameron’s chairmanship style is that his Cabinet colleagues policy ideas are
rooted in an ideology that he is unable and unwilling to convey publicly.
Cameron is pretty vacuous, lest we forget. The public don’t really know what he
stands for. Is he big C, little C, compassionate, common sense or modern?
Indeed, I would make the accusation that David Cameron and George Osborne are
essentially directionless without the deficit. The Big society is a damp squib
and Osborne does not possess the emotional skillset to set out an economic vision
for the country. This is one of the reasons why I think the Tory poll bounce on
the back of the EU veto has been so profound. Voters like strength, honesty and
patrotism [roughly in that order] and Europe has allowed David Cameron to frame
a pro-Britain narrative for his government. In these austere times people are
worried about the future and Cameron, like it or not, provided reassurance with
his actions last week. Labour in contrast, by trying to pick up Lib Dem voters
seemed neither pro or anti-Europe, and as such had nothing to say. They were
irrelevant to the conversation.

The harsh reality is that the only thing voters really know about Ed is that he ‘stabbed his brother in the back’. His party conference speech fell flat and he has have done little to expand on the producer/predator themes nor the Squeezed Middle. He needs to do this, fast. The public need something to hold on to. Shadow Cabinet colleagues also need to back him up, Labour should be making joint media appearances and explicitly promoting Ed’s vision. When things are tough you need to present a united party- something that Ed has achieved since becoming Labour leader and we need to remember that. But my overwhelming suggestion if you’re reading this, Ed, would be to go for a beer with your brother at an England match- and get on TV. A direct countenance to Cameron’s recent poll boost and crap jokes.
Mick Hills

Where are all the Labour lampooners? What a gift Cameron is and we should take that gift and portray him as the bully schoolboy he is, short trousers and cap. Flashman giving everyone dead legs in the playground, come on he is a an open target. ANY CARTOONISTS OUT THERE?
http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=100000623749669 Giles Bradshaw

TBH EM attempted to lay into DC with a gag and DC out gagged him
Thomas Baxter

Ed should concentrate on getting Dave to answer the question asked.
Even asking the speaker to compel him to answer the question!!
He lets Dave of the hook by failing to absorb the fact that Dave doesn’t
answer the question but generate daft one liners and glib assertions.
Perhaps the opposition should ask the same question again, and again
…ad nauseum to show what a farce PMQ’s have become.
Also tell Ed to stop repeating his openings three or four times before
getting to his question…he needs to talk more confidently and stop
this stutter questioning!
http://twitter.com/MrAdamRichards Adam Richards

Sunny, this is a good post. I agree with what yourself
and Mark suggest but I’d also make the following suggestions for Ed and
Labour.

What seems obvious to me is that Ed is trying to beat
Cameron on his own terms. Ed is never going to beat Cameron in a statesmanlike
competition, so I would ask, why enter the race? Ed’s response to Cameron’s bad
jokes with his own slightly-worse bad jokes yesterday was just another example
of this. Team Ed need to do more to portray him in contrast to Cameron- humble,
polite, non-sexist and intelligent- Ed’s strengths and conversely Cameron’s
weaknesses.

Labour should also recognise the difficulty in landing
blows on the Prime Minister. David Cameron is lucky in that he has a strong
Cabinet which has allowed him to assume a more presidential style. He is
removed from the public’s ire because he is largely detached from association
with the policies that his government is pursuing. He is more of a chairman
than a chief executive- his Cabinet colleagues all have their own agendas-
Lansley’s NHS, IDS’s welfare reforms, Gove’s schools etc.- are a key reason why
Cameron has such high personal ratings. This strategy has obviously made it
very difficult for Ed to land blows. Obviously Ed shouldn’t be doing all the
punching, we also need to see the Shadow Cabinet attacking there opposite
number. Ed has a very strong team and he needs to make use of it, specifically
in areas where Labour are strong in respect to the Coalition- I’m looking at
you, Andy Burnham and Caroline Flint.

Labour also need to recognise the context that any
attack is being played out in. The political avenues for expression during a
time of austerity are limited- there is not much you can do in terms of tax
cuts or spending so we need to get dirty- we need a master of the dark arts,
skullduggery and the like. We need Peter Mandelson.

In respect to PMQs in particular, Cameron’s chairman
style of governance while having benefits also has drawbacks- we all know he
has very little knowledge of the detail and Ed needs to continue picking this
up. Ed shouldn’t be looking to go toe-to-toe with Cameron, he needs to be
smarter and faster in his delivery of questions at PMQs, that is when he does
well.

Another distinct drawbackto Cameron’s chairmanship style
is that his Cabinet colleagues policy ideas are rooted in an ideology that he
is unable and unwilling to convey publicly. Cameron is pretty vacuous, lest we
forget. The public don’t really know what he stands for. Is he big C, little c,
compassionate, common sense or modern? Indeed, I would make the accusation that
David Cameron and George Osborne are essentially directionless without the
deficit. The Big society is a damp squib and Osborne does not possess the
emotional skillset to set out an economic vision

for the country. This is one of the reasons why I think
the Tory poll bounce on

the back of the EU veto has been so profound. Voters
like strength, honesty and patrotism [roughly in that order] and Europe has
allowed David Cameron to frame a pro-Britain narrative for his government. In
these austere times people are worried about the future and Cameron, like it or
not, provided reassurance with his actions last week. Labour in contrast, by
trying to pick up Lib Dem voters seemed neither pro or anti-Europe, and as such
had nothing to say. They were irrelevant to the conversation.

The harsh reality is that the only thing voters really
know about Ed is that he ‘stabbed his brother in the back’. His party
conference speech fell flat and he has have done little to expand on the
producer/predator themes nor the Squeezed Middle. He needs to do this, fast.
The public need something to hold on to. Shadow Cabinet colleagues also need to
back him up, Labour should be making joint media appearances and explicitly
promoting Ed’s vision. When things are tough you need to present a united
party- something that Ed has achieved since becoming Labour leader and we need
to remember that. But my overwhelming suggestion if you’re reading this, Ed,
would be to go for a beer with your brother at an England match- and get on TV.
A direct countenance to Cameron’s recent poll boost and crap jokes.
- Anonymous
  
  I think excellent points Adam.
  
  Jo
Pingback: Ed Miliband doesn’t have a PMQs problem- my response « Mr Adam Richards
Graham Wassell

Tragically, today, it doesn’t matter a damn whether the leader of a party is ideologically pure, clever, committed, loyal or even particularly honest. Why? Because all of these can be purchased, spun, demanded or otherwise embraced. Political gurus can be consulted. Professors on any subject can be seconded to advise. Business leaders of all kinds can provide commercial guidance. Media and entertainment stars can be flattered into adding lustre.

All that matters is that the leader has huge charisma, awesome presence, superb acting ability, quick wit, and thrilling articulacy. Such leaders are rare and they can win elections…even against giants.

We had one.

Ed will not be another.
Hugh

Yes, if only Labour tried that. We should mention he’s an old Etonian sometimes too.
Hugh

That’s interesting, thanks; I hadn’t really considered that.
Dave Postles

Leave it to Steve Bell.
Colin Adkins

Did you see the report from Nick Robinson which was so bias it should be subject to complaint? The BBC censored Miliband’s riposte to an admittedly good dig from Cameron. Why are we letting commentators or that judge on Question Time getting away with suggesting that Ed back-stabbeded David because he did not defer on grounds of age? The response to Cameron is I know you believe in such principles seeing that your then future mother-in- law allegedly got you a job with Carlton TV (reputedly as a very crap PR) on circa 80k on leaving university (average graduate starting salary 20 ish k) and a member of the Royal Household put a word in when he went for a job at Conservative Party Central Office.
http://www.facebook.com/people/Mike-Homfray/510980099 Mike Homfray

Totally agree with this, Sunny

Sabotage it, essentially
http://www.facebook.com/people/Mike-Homfray/510980099 Mike Homfray

If we have to follow the Blair-Cameron template then what’s the point – whilst style dominates over substance, Labour won’t win in any case
- Steven Nash
  
  I haven’t called for style without substance and I don’t see Ed as someone capable of delivering either one.
- Anonymous
  
  Yes but you have to come over better then them, Thatcher took lessons on her voice, Blair we are told took lessons on how to look in front of a camera and it won them both elections, with Blair even after the war went against him. it was his persona.
  
  Now look at when Blair does his hands and smile and look at Camera it looks so false but it did not when he was leader, partly because we now know about Blair and Thatcher.
  
  Cameron is better in front of the camera, better then Miliband and it worth votes.
http://www.facebook.com/people/Mike-Homfray/510980099 Mike Homfray

agreed.
- Anonymous
  
  But they do see the News and as we know the news would see Miliband being put in his place by a good solid put down.
  
  You can get away with it once or twice any more then that and the perception will be he’s no good at the job.
http://www.facebook.com/people/Mike-Homfray/510980099 Mike Homfray

This is exactly what needs to happen. Sabotage the nonsense. Don’t play the game
- Anonymous
  
  Also, don’t invite it Mike!
Anonymous

Sensible, balanced and pragmatic points- makes a refreshing change from some of the
“hysterical” and over hyped coverage in other quarters, every time Ed is deemed to have
“tripped up.”

Maybe too there is a problem in political commentary in the mainstream media;
eg having a fixed agenda; waiting in the wings to pounce?

I agree with you Sunny-PMQ’s is not the place to start or finish process of politics;
it’s all part of the limited Westminster bubble- a closed circle.

I think the key is bringing in the wider membership and looking outwards,
integration of people and ideas; plurality of approach.

Also the party not defining itself purely in terms of what happened in the past;
eg New Lab era, or “old” Labour; it’s about where we are now and where it’s possible to go.
I’d say, many possibilities.But I sincerely hope it won’t be rehashing of appealing only
to the “centre ground;”there are big issues at stake- and those need to be addressed.

It’s not just about political advantage or point scoring- but being relevant to ordinary people’s lives; engaging with the public; greater participation; working at ground level to make a difference.
I’d love to see a wide range of people involved, not just the party faithful; although
they are vital too.

On a final note, I’m quite shocked by the level of vitriole and speculation
being whipped up via some parts of the media; there is a definite impression
of “agenda” amongst a group out there- whose views I cannot understand.
Again- perhaps another “closed circle;”they need to realise it does not connect
to the public at large- and does not win elections!

Thanks, Jo.
Anonymous

He has very different qualities of character though I think Andrew-
which shines through.
Anonymous

I think it’s possible to be too defensive, and allow the party to be defined/limited
by constraints of opposition.We should be forging ahead down our own road; creating a separate identity; not trying to compete.If there is overlap of ideas and approach- good; let’s be honest about that; but where there is need for complete difference- there should be confidence in stating that, not just strategic positioning- which looks shallow.

There is a feeling of tip toing around the edges and not getting on with the real work needed at times; may be that is a wrong impression; but how much does the public ever get to hear/know otherwise?

Thanks Derek- wishing you a great Xmas too with your family.

Jo
- derek
  
  Thanks @Joanne28:disqus , great to see your still making really valid points.
  
  Wishing you and yours all the best for 2012 and if I ever do make it off moderation, I’ll reply more.
Ian

what Ed does not have is an electoral problem. Despite all the rubbish this week we have seen tonight a resounding victory in Feltham, a vote share like in Oldham and Barnsley returning to that of the Blair years. Ok it is a by election but you can only win what is in front of you and in but Scotland we won the council in 2011, council by elections and parliamentary by elections.

Ed like anyone has to improve, you should always strive to do that but lets not get dragged into Tory games of thinking it is all bad. the news tonight that we are in the Euro negotiations and we DID NOT ‘walk out’ will soon get the Tory right and papers angry.

Ed again has been proved right, all a PR stunt.
- Ian
  
  this is Labour’s third highest percentage majority in the constituency since it was created in 1955.
Daniel Speight

Interesting that Dan Hodges finishes his bit in the Torygraph with this.

Labour would still like to win the next election, but not at any price. For
that reason, while Ed Miliband is not secure, for the moment he is probably
safe.

Maybe I was reading into it more than what was there, but I had the feeling Dan was telling us that we should go for it at any price. This really sums up the Blairites and New Labour for me. It’s an Americanization of the party in that winning is all that matters. Principles have no place in this formula and it can be of no surprise that Labour MPs get caught stealing public money with dodgy expenses once any principles are removed. No surprise either to see Blair becoming extremely rich and telling us that his biggest mistake as prime minister was allowing curbs on fox hunting.
- Hugh
  
  You have a point there, but if Ed’s a true left winger, who would genuinely take a radically different approach to spending cuts, taxation, regulation, Europe, welfare reform and so on let him come out and say it.
  
  If he believes it, he should make the argument and spell out what it would mean in practice. At the moment he’s trying to play all sides – giving the impression to the left wing that he’d not be maintaining spending, would be reigning business in and protecting the vulnerable; trying to reassure swing voters he would get the deficit under control, wouldn’t put up their taxes, get scroungers back to work and would be business friendly. He’s trying a similar trick on almost any issue where there’s significant differences of opinion. (His one act of “bravery” – coming out against News International when it had long since come out against him and had no public support – is a tad overstated.)
  
  That’s not principled; it’s cynical. Either that or he has no particularly strong convictions. I’ve no real idea what his ideology actually is (who does?) but his approach in this respect is pure New Labour, just a little less competent.
  - Daniel Speight
    
    …but if Ed’s a true left winger, who would genuinely take a radically
    different approach to spending cuts, taxation, regulation, Europe,
    welfare reform and so on let him come out and say it.
    
    Hugh I’m not going to hold my breath waiting for that, but I will still applaud that the anointed brother didn’t get the leadership. Very biblical in a way isn’t it?
    - Hugh
      
      I’m not sure I’d go so far as that. It was simply a shame they both couldn’t lose.
Chilbaldi

This doesn’t get away from the fact that Ed Miliband is truly awful at PMQs, week after week.

This does also translate to other areas. Miliband is a poor speaker generally, constantly taking that sickening earnest, hectoring, moral high-ground tone.
http://nhsvault.blogspot.com Richard Blogger

I am broadly in favour of what you say. However, I do think that Ed should be better prepared.

- Don’t respond to Cameron’s “jokes” with a pre-scripted “joke” of your own; it does not work. Try thinking on your feet.
- Cameron always avoids the question, so it is pointless asking him a version of the same question six times; try asking six different questions instead
- Cameron is a good actor, but he does not do detail and he has a habit of falling back on offensive jibes; try to make sure that one question is one that his script writers cannot predict, so that Cameron shows that he does not know
- vary the number of questions you ask; Cameron has a habit of building to a crescendo, so deny him that pleasure

Cameron handled the 2010 election campaign in a very slick way. About the only time he slipped up was when he was interviewed by Gay Times (a TV interview) and he was asked a question he had not prepared for. He showed that he cannot think on his feet and worse, that he has no values that he could fall back on.

Government’s fail to get re-elected because they are *seen* to be (but not necessarily are) incompetent. The Tory machine did a very good job on the Brown government (I suspect history will have a different opinion). Pretty much everything this government has done has been incompetent; its about time that Labour made an issue of this.
Black

‘No one except the Westminster press pays attention to PMQs. It has zero impact on how people perceive a leader.’

-if this where true, you would not be writing about it.
David Warriet Edwards

Agree!

Pandering to the Westminster chatterati is not good for Millibrand or Labour which would show much more strength if it didn’t squander resource in the chamber – doing so just reinforces the general opinion that all politicians are the same at a time when Labour really needs to distance itself from the current system and provide a clearly different choice by the next election. If not, apathy will reign supreme and Cameron will get the absolute he needs to do even more damage.
Anonymous

Mark- sorry I’d not noticed this, and a bit late in the day,
but could I put in a good word for Derek as a long standing
and genuine poster on LL please?

Hope you don’t mind me saying this Derek; know you can be mischevious and a bit rude at times, but no more so than we hear frequently from many of the “naysayers” across the blogs, who have no interest in the Labour party, and are probably here to have a constant dig.

I know you to be kind hearted and have the best interests of Labour at heart, even if critical of “New Lab”- which some of us have been at times!

I would miss your presence greatly if not on LL, as I know long standing posters like Peter B and Dave P would likely back me up on….

I suppose in the past some of us have been labelled “Labour loyalists” by the naysayers Derek- and that rattles a few bloggers who might have a particular agenda in posting on political sites?

I’m sure you’d be willing to modify the odd few rude comments Derek;
I actually think the substance of what you have offered in the past has been excellent insight, and 99% of time feels very genuine and heartfelt.

I think in the past Mike H had some stick too along similar lines,
probably from the same few bloggers; I’m not sure.

(Sorry, that’s no reflection on any possible reasons for moderation- which I’m not aware of.)

Thankyou, Jo.
Pingback: Labour’s Infighting Only Distracts from the Real Enemy « A Mad Man With A Blog
Pingback: LabourList: Ed Miliband needs to stop trying so hard « Mr Adam Richards

Latest

Comment
Should people be asked if they are party supporters when they register to vote?

Chris Clark and Rav Seeruthun on a small change that if adopted, would free activists to spend more time on community work Every year at party conferences we hear professional politicians eulogise hard-working party volunteers. And there’s no activity more often evoked than that of ‘knocking on doors’. It’s a common delusion that the purpose of doorstep canvassing is to ‘persuade’ voters. Having taken part in our fair share of Labour canvassing sessions, we’ve both had the dispiriting experience of [...]
Read more →
Europe Featured
You can always rely on the Conservatives to ignore the public when it comes to Europe

By Douglas Alexander

Europe is not often the issue which comes top of people’s concerns on the doorstep. Nor do opinion polls suggest that Europe is a priority for voters when compared to issues like the economy or jobs. But you can always rely on the Conservatives to ignore the public when it comes to Europe. This week saw over a hundred Conservative MPs rebel and vote against their own Queens Speech. They were angry that it hadn’t included a bill which would [...]
Read more →
News Seats and Selections
Vicky Foxcroft selected as Labour’s PPC for Lewisham Deptford

Vicky Foxcroft has been selected by Lewisham Deptford CLP as the party’s candidate for 2015 at a selection meeting this afternoon. Here’s a brief biography: Vicky grew up in the North West in a single parent household, and was the first person in her family to go to university. She has held many positions in the party including Chair of Labour Students, has sat on the National Policy Forum and is currently a local councillor and is Chair of Lewisham [...]
Read more →
Comment
Labour’s future schools policy: why accountability matters

By Mike Ion

Stephen Twigg, Labour’s Shadow Education Secretary is one of the more thoughtful and pragmatic individuals to hold this vitally important brief for some time. To his credit Stephen has been out and about these past two years listening to pupils, teachers, parents and governors and finding out more about the challenges they face on a day-to-day basis. In addition Stephen has been looking closely at some local, regional, national and international programmes that have had a demonstrable impact in raising [...]
Read more →
News Seats and Selections
Falkirk selection process suspended by the party

The Labour Party have this afternoon suspended the selection process for Falkirk, after concerns were raised about “membership recruitment”. We understand that Ed Miliband was “keen to act swiftly” as the selection process was due to formally begin on Sunday. An officer of the party – yet to be confirmed – will investigate. A Labour spokesperson told us this afternoon: “We have suspended the start of the selection process of the Falkirk parliamentary seat. Concerns have been raised about membership [...]
Read more →

← previous next →

DOWNLOAD IT NOW: One Nation Labour – Debating the future

Signup to our daily email

Proudly sponsored by

LabourList Videos

Latest Posts

Ed Miliband doesn’t have a PMQs problem

Author:

Tags:

Share this Article

Latest

Should people be asked if they are party supporters when they register to vote?

You can always rely on the Conservatives to ignore the public when it comes to Europe

Vicky Foxcroft selected as Labour’s PPC for Lewisham Deptford

Labour’s future schools policy: why accountability matters

Falkirk selection process suspended by the party

Email*
Forename
Surname