PMQs Verdict: Is anyone surprised by David Cameron’s scripted flippancy?

27th February, 2013 2:35 pm

Sometimes an entire PMQs is summed up by one excuse. Occasionally that’s because there has been a superb point made, or a slice of rapier-like wit has clearly won the day. But more often it’s because the whole session was a bit dull, with the exception of one slightly less dull thing. Today was very much of the latter.

Most of the comment in the Westminster/media bubble has been about Ed Miliband’s less than tactful response (“scraping the barrel”) when asked about Anthony Seldon’s recent hatchet job on Ed Balls. What Miliband obviously meant was that pulling out newspaper or magazine columns to attack Labour was “scraping the barrel” – but it evidently came across as an attack on the Staggers, regardless of intention. Fortunately they’ve taken it in good humour.

That Cameron would stoop to quoting an open letter/attack piece from a magazine with the history of the New Statesman should have come as no surprise to seasoned PMQs observers. After all this is someone who has previously quoted Luke Bozier and referenced Matt Zarb-Cousin’s tweets at PMQs. No quote is too small for the Prime Minister…

Yet this week the most engaging sections of the “debate” were with backbenchers. Not the back and forth between Cameron and his colleagues (those questions were deathly dull, and featured the word “Eastleigh” as if sampled on a loop), but those with the Labour backbenchers. Alas none of them thought to deviate away from their scripted questions to ask why David Cameron was sat next to the homophobic Welsh secretary, but there were poigniant questions on the Bedroom Tax and the disabled, culminating in perhaps the most inaccurate statement Cameron has ever made at PMQS (a heck of an achievement):

“This government always puts disabled people first” 

If only that were true Mr Cameron, but unlike your scripted remarks bashing Ed Balls, that was presumably a slip of the tongue, because the evidence points towards the disabled being disproportionately hit. Shame on you. Perhaps next week instead of boning up on the latest columns in lefty magazines, or the latest tweets from Labour researchers, you might want to read up on the impact your government’s cuts are having on the disabled…

  • Colin McCulloch

    Well said, Mark.

  • Monkey_Bach

    Cameron is so evasive, answering every question fielded by Miliband with a question of his own, perhaps Prime Minister’s Questions ought to be renamed Leader of the Opposition’s Questions. Eeek.

  • Mike Homfray

    I think the New Statesman’s constant negativity is ‘bottom of the barrel’ – Hodges writes for them, and the Seldon article from a public school head who we shouldn’t allow within a million miles of the party was another anti-Labour hatchet job. I’m planning to cancel my subscription if it continues

    • John Ruddy

      Have you already cancelled your subscription? Hodges resigned – as an occiasional blogger, not a regular columnist – in October 2011 when they didnt run a piece that was critical of Ed Miliband.
      I think the Seldon article was helpful, in that it showed out out-of-touch that side of the party is.

    • Matthew Blott

      I know they have terrible circulation problems and wondered who actually paid for it. Now I know.

  • Kayleigh Anne

    It was pretty bottom of the barrel for Cameron to reference yet another tired “Blairite attacks key Brown aide” piece (it’d be like quoting Dan Hodges – pointless, predictable and not particularly effective given that Ed’s polling higher than Cameron), but seeing so many people say Ed should apologise to New Statesman was just sad.

    • David B

      Why should Cameron not comment on a newspaper piece regardless of the newspaper. After all it is in the public domain. Should Ed Miliband be stop from quoting, say, The Mail because it does not support Labour. More importantly Ed tried to be cleaver and completely messed up and Cameron slapped him down, just as Ed would have done if the roles were reversed. That is what PMQ is all about, and has been for some time.

  • Hamish Dewar

    Why does Labour go along with this charade?

    “Question number 1, Mr Speaker.”

    “I have had meetngs with colleages and others this morning and apart from my duties in this House, I will have further such meetings this afternoon.”
    Followed by rhetorical questions and non-answers.
    PMQs contribute nothing to the governance of this country.

  • Daniel Speight

    Funny how nobody quotes Luke Bozier anymore. What happened to all his mates? Fear of guilt by association I guess. Oh well, we will just have to wait until Hodges get caught up to something naughty.


  • Featured News Tories accused of playing political games over Syria as Labour splits denied

    Tories accused of playing political games over Syria as Labour splits denied

    Labour insiders are fuming at the accusations that there is a split between Jeremy Corbyn and Hilary Benn over Syria. Reports this morning suggested that the leader’s office had failed to inform Shadow Foreign Secretary Benn that he was invited to a Downing St security briefing on Syria. Both Corbyn and Benn’s team deny a breakdown in communication, and sources claim that it has come from the Tories’ playing political games with the issue. They say that the email inviting Corbyn […]

    Read more →
  • Comment PMQs Verdict: Punchy performance from Corbyn on comfortable ground

    PMQs Verdict: Punchy performance from Corbyn on comfortable ground

    PMQs are difficult for an Opposition leader at the best of times; before an economic set-piece statement, they must be nigh on impossible. You’re going up against the Prime Minister blind, knowing the person across the despatch box knows every detail of what is about to be announced, and that anything you do will be overshadowed by what follows. Jeremy Corbyn approached today’s debate with six fairly specific questions: four on climate change and renewables, and two on domestic violence […]

    Read more →
  • News John Healey slams Osborne’s housebuilding bluster

    John Healey slams Osborne’s housebuilding bluster

    George Osborne is receiving praise in the press this morning for his expected pledge to invest in housebuilding during the Autumn Statement today. However, the 400,000 subsidised homes he is expected to pledge be built by 2020 comes after Housing minister Brandon Lewis said a million would be built back in September. Ahead of Osborne’s address to the Commons this afternoon, Labour have slammed the Tories’ “bluster”, and pointed out that David Cameron has presided over the worst peacetime record of […]

    Read more →
  • Comment Featured The griping and plots need to stop so we can get on with being an opposition

    The griping and plots need to stop so we can get on with being an opposition

    The Conservatives are having a great time. Today, in their Spending Review they’ll outline their budget plans, which will include monumentally savage cuts. Deeper cuts than in any other major economy. Meanwhile, the Labour party is embroiled in internal battles, the kind of which shows little sign of abating. But it needs to, and soon. Less than two weeks after Jeremy Corbyn’s landslide victory, talks of when and how to oust Labour’s newly elected leader made it into the papers. […]

    Read more →
  • Comment Featured The 8 lies the Tories tell about poverty

    The 8 lies the Tories tell about poverty

    In the town Kirkcaldy where I was brought up and which I represented in Parliament until earlier this year, there is a small and wonderfully innovative family centre devoted to helping children in need. Three years ago at Christmas it provided parcels for 100 children in need.  Last year the figure had risen to 500. This year it will be 800. A few years ago the main presents were toys. Now the gifts have to be basic food and essentials.  In some cases, the families do not just need food: […]

    Read more →
Share with your friends