is brown right about pmqs?

5 Jul

I haven’t listened to yesterday’s PMQs yet. I get the Guardian podcast, but I’m way, way behind with my podcasts, so Gordon Brown’s first Prime Minister’s Questions have completely passed me by.

Reports suggest he bombed.

Brown has dismissed the weekly tête-a-tête as mere theatre, and asked that he be left to “get on with the business of change.” I think Brown has a point. I don’t think my parents, relatively switched on folk that they are, have ever watched PMQs, and nor are they interested in the daily twitterings of the self-important, liquid lunch politicos who fill our newspapers and suck farts on the TV. They couldn’t care less.

The vast majority of the population couldn’t give a shit about parliamentary politics. They care about services, they care about society, and they care about how much money they have in their pocket at the end of the month. Cameron may love to pander to his crowd, strutting around like a peacock with his dick out, but does he really think that the country gives a flying fuck?

They don’t. Brown will be judged on cold hard results, not petty theatrics.

Advertisements

18 Responses to “is brown right about pmqs?”

  1. hiu43f@bangor.ac.uk November 30, -0001 at 12:00 am #

    It’s always worth remembering that Hague often got the better of Blair in PMQ’s… only to get crushed like an insect in the election.

  2. hiu43f@bangor.ac.uk November 30, -0001 at 12:00 am #

    It’s always worth remembering that Hague often got the better of Blair in PMQ’s… only to get crushed like an insect in the election.

  3. jacoblurch@gmail.com July 6, 2007 at 6:42 am #

    Very true Tyger. The electorate don’t care much about PMQs and why should they when all it seems to be is about petty point scoring.

  4. jacoblurch@gmail.com July 6, 2007 at 6:42 am #

    Very true Tyger. The electorate don’t care much about PMQs and why should they when all it seems to be is about petty point scoring.

  5. endofthegarden@yahoo.com July 6, 2007 at 8:58 am #

    The thing about PMQs is you get to see the PM standing alone – with no back up. His or her party can sense the mood in the air. When the PM is on form the government party is happy and well lead. When the PM can’t even remember how many days he’s been in office then people will start to wonder.After all PMQs were the first sign that Ming is heading towards the rocks.Brown’s attempts at spin to answer this add up just as badly as his estimate of how many days he’d been in office. He says its all about change – but then paralyses the NHS with a massive review ( code as we all know for waiting for the answer the review has already been given – chose the head of the review and you chose the answer.)He spins against theatre – but then puts up a Union flag over No10 and makes a whole load of cringe worthy pseudo patriotic statements that would be a whole lot more convincing if they weren’t made by a man who helped break up the UK and continues to under fund English peoples NHS, education etc compared to his own constituents who are being looked after quite nicely by the SNP right now.PMQs aren’t definitive – but the crack in the armour is there and its very public. The way Brown failed also suggest deeper underlying character flaws. Brown will have to learn very quickly. I suspect that Labour party politics has prepared him poorly for open debate with people who aren’t afraid of you.

  6. endofthegarden@yahoo.com July 6, 2007 at 8:58 am #

    The thing about PMQs is you get to see the PM standing alone – with no back up. His or her party can sense the mood in the air. When the PM is on form the government party is happy and well lead. When the PM can’t even remember how many days he’s been in office then people will start to wonder.After all PMQs were the first sign that Ming is heading towards the rocks.Brown’s attempts at spin to answer this add up just as badly as his estimate of how many days he’d been in office. He says its all about change – but then paralyses the NHS with a massive review ( code as we all know for waiting for the answer the review has already been given – chose the head of the review and you chose the answer.)He spins against theatre – but then puts up a Union flag over No10 and makes a whole load of cringe worthy pseudo patriotic statements that would be a whole lot more convincing if they weren’t made by a man who helped break up the UK and continues to under fund English peoples NHS, education etc compared to his own constituents who are being looked after quite nicely by the SNP right now.PMQs aren’t definitive – but the crack in the armour is there and its very public. The way Brown failed also suggest deeper underlying character flaws. Brown will have to learn very quickly. I suspect that Labour party politics has prepared him poorly for open debate with people who aren’t afraid of you.

  7. davehill7@blueyonder.co.uk July 6, 2007 at 12:20 pm #

    PMQs matter to the troops but not to the electorate. The main lesson of Brown’s first foray was how much is going to stay the same post-Tone.http://commentisfree.guardian.co.uk/dave_hill/2007/07/clunking_fist_steady_as_he_goes.html

  8. davehill7@blueyonder.co.uk July 6, 2007 at 12:20 pm #

    PMQs matter to the troops but not to the electorate. The main lesson of Brown’s first foray was how much is going to stay the same post-Tone.http://commentisfree.guardian.co.uk/dave_hill/2007/07/clunking_fist_steady_as_he_goes.html

  9. aaronsheath@gmail.com July 6, 2007 at 4:03 pm #

    Man in shed,Thanks for dropping by and leaving such a well-informed comment. However, I would counter some of what you say.Over the past couple of years Brown has, on occasion, looked a complete pillock. The highlighted patriotism drive would be a prime example, but I can’t help but think these are occasions when the dour Scot has listened to his ‘advisors.’Brown is a serious guy, who is in politics because he believes in making things better. You may hate his statist approach and his politics in general (some of which I loathe), but the constant sniping from many in the Tory ranks does not ring true. On QT last week, Michael Howard attempted to resurrect the spin label for Brown’s Labour. Brown doesn’t go in for spin – he never has (the media-driven body-politic seems to baffle him). Modern politics means, by definition, that the news has to handled, but do the Tories really believe that Brown is more of a media-animal than Cameron? Do me a favour.Brown has his faults. But much of the criticism, including my own, has been formed through the prism of the TBGB spat, the subsequent rampant skulduggery, and Brown’s penchant for sulkiness. Brown doesn’t have this excuse now, but he also doesn’t have these worries either.Judge Brown on how the next 12-months play out. Because, and regular readers will vouch for me here, if he screws up, the criticism will be louder and more vitriolic from this blog than any Tory one, I assure you…

  10. aaronsheath@gmail.com July 6, 2007 at 4:03 pm #

    Man in shed,Thanks for dropping by and leaving such a well-informed comment. However, I would counter some of what you say.Over the past couple of years Brown has, on occasion, looked a complete pillock. The highlighted patriotism drive would be a prime example, but I can’t help but think these are occasions when the dour Scot has listened to his ‘advisors.’Brown is a serious guy, who is in politics because he believes in making things better. You may hate his statist approach and his politics in general (some of which I loathe), but the constant sniping from many in the Tory ranks does not ring true. On QT last week, Michael Howard attempted to resurrect the spin label for Brown’s Labour. Brown doesn’t go in for spin – he never has (the media-driven body-politic seems to baffle him). Modern politics means, by definition, that the news has to handled, but do the Tories really believe that Brown is more of a media-animal than Cameron? Do me a favour.Brown has his faults. But much of the criticism, including my own, has been formed through the prism of the TBGB spat, the subsequent rampant skulduggery, and Brown’s penchant for sulkiness. Brown doesn’t have this excuse now, but he also doesn’t have these worries either.Judge Brown on how the next 12-months play out. Because, and regular readers will vouch for me here, if he screws up, the criticism will be louder and more vitriolic from this blog than any Tory one, I assure you…

  11. aaronsheath@gmail.com July 6, 2007 at 4:04 pm #

    Thanks for the link, Dave.

  12. aaronsheath@gmail.com July 6, 2007 at 4:04 pm #

    Thanks for the link, Dave.

  13. ashoksoni@hotmail.com July 6, 2007 at 5:31 pm #

    pmq is about theatre. is theatre really that important to the wellbeing of the individual?with regards to the point about how it affect the (party) troops I agree. Having said it is possible to close/modify one form of nourishment and produce/develop another.

  14. ashoksoni@hotmail.com July 6, 2007 at 5:31 pm #

    pmq is about theatre. is theatre really that important to the wellbeing of the individual?with regards to the point about how it affect the (party) troops I agree. Having said it is possible to close/modify one form of nourishment and produce/develop another.

  15. susan@susankidd.wanadoo.co.uk July 6, 2007 at 10:53 pm #

    Of course PMQ’s is all about theatre and is really only of interest to members of ‘the village’ and politico anoraks.But if the media had reported that Brown had convincingly won the exchanges I’m sure his comments would have been different.Just the first round of many to be sure but a bit of a sore loser methinks!

  16. susan@susankidd.wanadoo.co.uk July 6, 2007 at 10:53 pm #

    Of course PMQ’s is all about theatre and is really only of interest to members of ‘the village’ and politico anoraks.But if the media had reported that Brown had convincingly won the exchanges I’m sure his comments would have been different.Just the first round of many to be sure but a bit of a sore loser methinks!

  17. ashoksoni@hotmail.com July 7, 2007 at 1:13 pm #

    is there any reason why PMQ can not evolve in to PMTQ – where the replies to the questions may be given by the members of the front bench and not just the PM. makes sense if politics is to become less confrontational and more collegiate.

  18. ashoksoni@hotmail.com July 7, 2007 at 1:13 pm #

    is there any reason why PMQ can not evolve in to PMTQ – where the replies to the questions may be given by the members of the front bench and not just the PM. makes sense if politics is to become less confrontational and more collegiate.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s