The principle still stands.
Politics at Westminster | BREAKING: UKIP
- Thread starter Team Brian GB
- Start date
-
In the latest episode of the United Hour Podcast, Nik (@Rood) is joined by CEO Duncan Drasdo and Financial Director Andy Green from the Manchester United Supporters Trust for a special episode on all things behind the scenes at Old Trafford including a brief history of MUST and their aims today, views on INEOS and Sir Jim Ratcliffe so far, and the Old Trafford regeneration.
Its a slippery slope. He uses it now, there will always be some justification or other for using it in the future.
Another insipid performance at PMQ's and a likely rebellion from MP's tonight with at a minimum quite a few abstentions and possibly even some MP's voting with the conservatives.
Its not looking great at the moment for Jeremy...
Its not looking great at the moment for Jeremy...
I can't stand Cameron on this whenever I watch him. He just treats it as one big opportunity to big himself up and laugh about with his mates whenever serious questions are asked. The prime example of party politics and the dire state of Westminster politics.
Corbyn changed it up this time. The emailed questions were just lead-ins & he followed them up, trying to put more pressure on Cameron than he did last time, and being a bit more forensic. He even made a few jokes at the PM's expenses, albeit well within the bounds of taste. But Cameron sounded totally unruffled and got away with yet more responses that could have been copied and pasted off the Tory website.
the entrance was bad enough - silence from his own mp'sif you say so
that was probably as good as it got for him
During Corbyn's debut at PMQs Cameron had to regain his footing somewhat in response to the email Q&A, but this lunchtime he looked far more comfortable i think. The questions did help in this regard; the topics chosen were similar to last time which allowed him to voice some more effective answers.
Labour's present housing policy isn't good enough for them to be going tote-to-toe with the Government on, not as Corbyn is attempting anyway. And whilst it is certainly arguable that the tax credit reforms could cause problems for the Tories, they can point to flaws in the previous system.
Labour's present housing policy isn't good enough for them to be going tote-to-toe with the Government on, not as Corbyn is attempting anyway. And whilst it is certainly arguable that the tax credit reforms could cause problems for the Tories, they can point to flaws in the previous system.
McDonnell wasn't there again, dunno if he had other appointments or something but if not, they seem to want to hide him.
exactly - starting a question with I dont expect the pm to be able to answer now but I hope he can put a responce in writing is a poor way to use a question and basically gives the pm free reign with his answer - it seemed poorly thought out and the execution was far from rousing.
Corbyns spin doctor (yes he has one) was refused entry to the public galley for not wearing a tie (again poor planning) till he managed to borrow one
probably the best bit of planning they did.
The questioning needs to be more instinctive, with at least a few of the points raised pertaining to subjects of the moment.
Makes a change from the Conservatives trying to hide the Prime Minister during the election campaign. Not to mention popular figures like IDS and Gove.
The new style of questioning works or doesn't work depending on what you see the goal of PMQs as. If it's to have a civilised debate with the PM, it's fine. If it's to put pressure on the government, it's awful. But splitting the q's up into two themes and asking follow-ups is a definite improvement on week 1 at least.
I'd argue it's never been much of a platform to pressure the PM, certainly not since he's learnt to dive or mock any question. He'll never give a genuine response as he knows there's no reason for him to go along with it, only that he shouldn't risk a cock up.
The whole thing is a farce with hand picked questions and canned responses. The worse being of course tory MPS who want to feel involved so just ask vanity questions.
Until they're allowed to stand their and demand an actual response then it's just an excuse for them to get paid.
Except it didn't happen like that. He pointed out that Cameron didn't answer the question, repeated what he actually asked and said perhaps he can respond in writing, and then moved on to asking the actual question about breast cancer.
Tax credits and housing are not subjects of the moment?
Even Miliband managed big wins at PMQs, you do it by having your own benches shouting down the PM in unison as you highlight the crux of your argument, whilst he sits there uncomfortably and his benches can't bring themselves to shout back. That's the stuff that comes across in the 10 second segment on the news as the government in trouble. At the moment he just asks "where's the new civilised PMQs?" and it fizzles out. You don't want him to be enjoying himself, as he will in this style.
In fairness I'd say that between 2011 and 2013 Miliband and Balls had Cameron on the ropes many times. If you ask the right question then Cameron has no choice but to try & negate your point, or you come out looking better.
I doubt that resonates with the majority of voters to be honest. They just think look at these childish idiots and the point never gets across.
The BBC has a headline on its front page on Cameron and Corbyn clashing over tax credits and Affordable Housing. I think that's as decent outcome as you can expect as it puts Corbyn on the right side of two key issues.
Let me rephrase, he should incorporate recent or breaking stories into his line of questioning.
By knowingly distorting the 450,000 figure you mean? A rather old politics piece of spin i thought at the time.
Such as?
Not mentioning the government's u-turn on the Saudi prison deal was bizarre, for one. He'd asked Cameron to reverse it and it happened. Might've been more to do with Gove but if you can claim any credit, why not do so?
He could Ubik. I'm not sure how many people actually care about it though. Against a background of mult-billion pound arms sales to Saudi it's less than a pin-prick.
Given what many in the Labour movement believe they represent, i'd have gone with at least one of the following health topics:
- NHS trusts reducing the services provided to the hearing impaired
- Further clarity on the junior doctors pay dispute
- Budgetary concerns as we approach the intensive winter period
All fair Nick, but not riots on the streets stuff. Tax credit cuts actually are, although I assume there will be headed off by a u-turn first.
MPs back government budget rules
The result of the vote. 320 MPs in favour and 258 against. That's a majority of 62 in favour of George Osborne's fiscal charter. The BBC is hearing that about 30 Labour MPs defied the leadership by abstaining.
The result of the vote. 320 MPs in favour and 258 against. That's a majority of 62 in favour of George Osborne's fiscal charter. The BBC is hearing that about 30 Labour MPs defied the leadership by abstaining.
What do they gain from abstaining? Not that it would have made a difference, but they're elected, and paid, to vote on these things.
30... That's quite a few defying a three line whip especially so close to the start of the Corbyn leadership.
They can force a new leadership election with 47!
I can't see him lasting long if they have bad election results in may
Been updated. Labour party whip saying that 20 MPs abstained.
Plus 37 who did not turn up (16 with permission)
Complete waste of parliamentary time. Cameron & Co should be running the country not trying to score election points when there isn't even an election.
'oh, we'd best just put 'in normal times' in, just in case, like'. Meaningless.
'oh, we'd best just put 'in normal times' in, just in case, like'. Meaningless.
Nope the 21 figure now reported is the 37 who abstained minus 16 who had permission not to be there
The Newsnight discussion on this was a complete joke, Burgon for Labour and Zahawi for the Tories both looking like genuine imbeciles.
Not even going to go into McDonnell's "embarrassing...embarrassing..." ridiculousness.
Not even going to go into McDonnell's "embarrassing...embarrassing..." ridiculousness.
The debate showed the problem Labour still has. Osborne is a much better communicator, and he has the far easier argument (various riffs on the household budget). Any non-politics type would no doubt find his speech easy to understand and convincing.
McDonnell on the other hand not only has a harder argument, he's not very good at making it. His speech was true enough, but it was fuzzy and didn't sound very convincing.
Balls and Miliband regularly challenged Osbornes silly economics but what they never came up with a message with the clarity of Osborne's. Their attempted riposte, "too far too fast" didn't work and ended up being a symbol of their failure.
Labour are still looking for the way to get an anti-austerity message across. Not really sure how they're going to approach it.
McDonnell on the other hand not only has a harder argument, he's not very good at making it. His speech was true enough, but it was fuzzy and didn't sound very convincing.
Balls and Miliband regularly challenged Osbornes silly economics but what they never came up with a message with the clarity of Osborne's. Their attempted riposte, "too far too fast" didn't work and ended up being a symbol of their failure.
Labour are still looking for the way to get an anti-austerity message across. Not really sure how they're going to approach it.
Still disastrous when the shadow cabinet won't back the position
Imagine the Trident or hs2 debates... They are going to have even bigger splits
By the way, did anyone see Caroline Lucas' contribution to the debate? Basically she was saying that it was bad economics not to borrow to invest. Someone asked her at what point you should stop borrowing and she said "You stop borrowing when you can't afford to pay it back".
Needless to say the place fell about laughing. I felt for Lucas because she's a decent woman and it kind of came out wrong, but in all honesty, I couldn't stop laughing myself.
Needless to say the place fell about laughing. I felt for Lucas because she's a decent woman and it kind of came out wrong, but in all honesty, I couldn't stop laughing myself.
I would have voted for the green party last election but when I read their manifesto and got to the bits on the economy I realised they were unelectable.
Obviously they know that they're not going to get into power anyway, but they surely have to make themselves a credible party. They damage their own movement by seeming to be pie-in-the-sky idealists at every turn.