Bluntness was the order of the day

Mark

I agree with you, Peter.

And, apart from backbench morale, the main point of PMQ's is the bit that gets on telly (if any bit does).

That is why, for example, in his first few weeks as prime minister, Brown made a point of issuing some headline-grabbing announcement (e.g. no "super casino") each Wednesday.

Keith

At last, the signs of a Tory fightback!!

Pat

Well, we got the labour investment- and now we're getting the returns on that investment.

David

I agree, too. The media coverage afterwards has focused on exactly the issue I presume Cameron hoped it would; questioning whether borrowing is indeed good.

David Lindsay

"Oh, so if it was 10 years ago, then it doesn't count?", sneered Cameron at PMQs.

Well, George Osborne must certainly hope so...

Incidentally, how did Keynes pronounce his own surname? And if "Kaynes", then why is it Milton "Keenes"?

RODEST

Peter, I think the big problem that the opposition parties have with this government (who have been grossley inept for many years) is that each time they announce their policies Nulabour hijack them claiming they were their ideas.

The opposition are aware of this Nulabour strategy and they need to concentrate on highlighting the contradictions in Browns ever changing policies.

Brown seems to dismiss the fact that what he has already spent and what he will borrow in the future will have to be paid back by the ordinary taxpayer.

This is a point I think Cameron needs to focus on, particularly the hardship of people already deep in debt. The prospect of higher taxes for a very long period after this recession has past will make life unberable for millions of people.

R Mason

Brown has invested massively in creating a large constituency in the civil service, local authorites, Quangos, benefit claiments, immigrants, etc. that are dependent on high taxes, and there are quite a few around who have bought the 'disaster exported from the US' line. If he did what he should - cut spending and reduce taxes - he would have to reverse everything he believes in and has done for the last 11 years, ie, increase the size of the state at the expense of the private sector and risk losing his constituency. He also knows that borrowing as a strategy is unsustainable in the long term, ie, till 2010 so I expect that he intends to lie his way through the next few few months and call a GE before the sh!t hits the fan, leave everything to the Tories with a much smaller majority so they will struggle which he will say is their fault and then, if they fall, he will be back in!!

ChrisD

"My verdict sprang from what I saw as the main Tory goal today: to stop Brown's "Borrowing is good" narrative taking root in the public consciousness."

That is exactly why I agree with you on this point. I read Fraser's analysis of PMQ's today with growing disbelief. Didn't bother to post because I would have simple been lazy and lifted my point from the comments thread of his article on sloganeering.

Brown is going to fight for his political life on the mantra that responsible borrowing is good and irresponsible cuts are bad.
When I saw Clegg's question today, I saw him digging an even bigger hole for his party. You don't give Brown any ammunition to distract or back up his strategy in this way. Instead you oppose and undermine his argument over and over again until its firmly based in the electorates mind.

Brown is being dishonest, but then he got away with it for so long back in the old days when ever the Tories regularly walked into this gaping black hole of trap. Brown is banking on the Tories making that mistake again.

I don't want the media focussed on some alternative economic strategy from the Tories, I want them fully focussed on what this government is doing right now. If the Tories deliver a contrast being sought by some journalists, they take the heat and the attention away from the mistakes being made by the government.

It might give some on here the chance to shine as they show off their economic knowledge, buts its not good long term politics for an opposition party to be distracted enough to end up with a corner rather than a goal.

There is a lot of bad news still to come, and I expect the great illusionist Gordon Brown to start re announcing spending plans just like the old days.
I wonder if he has already started using this trick with the supposed announcement of £700 million pounds for military vehicles? Won't hold my breath to see if the media check this out properly though.

Henry Rogers

David Lindsay,
I've always heard economists say 'Kaynes'. He was their fellow tribesman after all!

Quite why a village in the general area of Bletchley was chosen to give its name to the new town/city is another story, but MK is always pronounced 'Keens'.

10 years is a great deal more recent than some of the events Mr Brown uses in his arguments. I thought the poor chap looked decidedly ground down today, the 'hyper' phase of a week or so back seems to have gone. You can see why parliamentary sessions get shorter and shorter.

On the whole I think Peter's analysis convinces me more than Nelson's does today. Perhaps a boring slugging match really was Cameron's best tactic, though I suppose all of us, regardless of party allegance, would much prefer brilliant debate with extemporary argument matched to extemporary argument and nothing recited from memory or a briefing folder.

Pete, Scotland

Depends on who the intended audience was.

He still talks like somebody in a debating society, scoring technical points.

Thatchers 'good household budget' stuff was much better and more effective.

Every household in the land could understand that.

You can agree or disagree with her politics but she got that message across nice and clear, and that made her a winner.

Nicholas

Yes, the £700m for new and improved military vehicles announced in response to a planted question. £700m that should have been spent on new and improved vehicles before soldiers were sent to die in crap ones by the same government that embroiled them in two wars.

Interesting piece of theatre. I hope it is put under the intense scrutiny it deserves.

Ken

In all honesty why would any sane opposition party want to win power just as atomic fallout hits with full force? Five more years of hard labour would properly punish and destroy McRuin's marxists forever.

Pete, Scotland

"This is beyond crucial."

What is beyond crucial is that New Labour (Brown) start getting some negative headlines.

Somebody has to step up to the mark on this.

Paul Lettan

I would propose caution here. The Conservatives should pay especial attention to what is happening in the United States. Obama has built up a formidable election operation based on a different discourse. It would be a mistake to underestimate the influence of Galbraith in the north American psyche. He is undergoing a revival in both Republican and Democrat circles. McCain's espousal of knee jerk neo-liberalism isn't exactly an unqualified success.

Chris

>Incidentally, how did Keynes pronounce his own surname? And if "Kaynes", then why is it Milton "Keenes"?

Milton Keynes isn't named after Keynes (or Milton.)

Pete, Scotland

Just read Osborne's letter in the Telegraph.

So many words with such little meaning.

How on earth do they expect anybody to vote for that lot of nonesense.

Do they think we are stupid?

Paul Lettan

Re: Keynes pronunciation

why not ask his son who works with the Charles Darwin Trust (named after his grandfather) in Highbury. You may find it rhymes with 'keens' not 'canes'!

Quadratus

Pete,Scotland 9.57p.m.

Yes,obviously.

Travis Bickle

They know the electorate are stupid , which is why so many among us seem to think that the still clearly stark naked Emperor Brown has suddenly emerged in a new set of clothes.

Steve

Pete, Scotland.

Got it in one. We live in a country that has freely voted in the party of economic illiteracy and historical failure. The winner of the next election must appeal to millions who cannot think beyond the next pint of lager.