Harman lays out Labour's election strategy in PMQs
Lloyd Evans 3:01pm
The B-team were back today. With Gordon Brown abroad on Superman duty it was left to Hague and Harman to slug it out. Harman was as useless as ever, unsteady, inarticulate, hectoring, self-satisfied. Rather than engage with the debate she ducks incoming fire and replies with a prepared weapon. Yet again we heard that the Tories would ‘do nothing’, that they opposed the fiscal stimulus, they fought the VAT cut and so forth. Her killjoy mannerisms suggest a head-girl scolding trouble-makers for pillow-fighting after lights out. But she looked less obviously uncomfortable at the despatch box today. Hague, by contrast, seemed too relaxed, almost detached. Instead of taking his Lamborghini wit out for a spin he just parked it in the garage.
His sole tactic – to expose the rift between the government and the Bank of England over the fiscal stimulus – failed to put Hattie under serious pressure. Thrice he tried to get her to answer and thrice she dodged the question. She got away with it because sins of omission don’t come across on telly. They certainly never make the evening news and it’s a pity Hague hadn’t contrived a more dangerous ambush for her. Instead he amused himself with quips at Labour’s expense. He mocked the PM and Peter Mandelson for their forthcoming trips to Chile and Brazil, respectively. ‘The business secretary should be implementing schemes not unpacking his Speedos on a South American beach.’
Harman’s attempts to change the subject from the fiscal stimulus to inheritance tax brought a flash of caustic merriment from Hague. ‘The question was about the Governor of Bank of England,’ he reminded her, ‘though I know inheritance may preoccupy the niece of the Countess of Longford.’
Vince Cable had some colourful language up his sleeve. ‘The Bank of England’s governor has sent his tanks down the Mall, seized control of economy and put the government under house arrest.’ Most backbench questions focussed on local issues but in the dying minutes Justine Greening raised the issue of further education funding which provoked a furious response from Harman. When Labour came to power, she claimed, the budget for higher education had been, ‘zero pounds’. Rather incredibly she suggested that the current £600 million budget would be wiped out if the Tories returned to office.
This was a B-grade PMQs but it was also highly illuminating. Advertently or not, Hattie today laid out the whole of Labour’s election strategy. Core message: ‘We help, they do nothing’. There’ll be no space for detail - just a campaign of attrition on the twin fronts of taxation and spending. Endless scare stories will spread the myth that the Tories will slash all public service budgets to nothing. And every tax question will be parried with the claim that Conservative IHT reform will be targeted at the rich few. This tactic can be articulated in various ways. Today Hattie road-tested a couple of phrases, ‘£2bn squandered’ and ‘a £200,000 tax cut for three thousand.’ She also aired a catch-all slogan - ‘millionaires' manifesto’ - which we’re bound to hear more of in the coming year.
So there it is. Labour’s pitch to the voters is crude, narrow, wilfully inaccurate and bound to appeal most to the most dimwitted. It, therefore, has a high chance of electoral success, and Tory generals would do well to find an equally unsophisticated means of returning fire.
Previous
WBG
March 25th, 2009 3:25pm Report this commentIt, therefore, has a high chance of electoral success, and Tory generals would do well to find an equally unsophisticated means of returning fire.
Clearly the author has never read the book 'How To Win Friends and Influence People'.
A decent article ruined by one moronic statement. One must ask who the 'dimwitted' really are?
Wily Trout
March 25th, 2009 3:42pm Report this commentThe dimwitted - Labour voters, surely? Well they're going to vote Labour anyhow. Shouldn't she be speaking to the Middle England that Tony Blair won over?
Robert Simpson
March 25th, 2009 3:47pm Report this commentI do wonder how effective "Tory cuts" attacks will be, especially when you look at how the national debt level has shot up the political agenda.
I think to a certain extent it depends on whether or not Labour ministers are met with "Well, what would you cut then?" when they make this attack. So far most interviewers seem not to go down this route, even though it's quite obvious that either party would have to cut spending.
If the Conservatives can persuade people that cuts are inevitable and necessary, Labour will look disingenuous. It's quite plausible that a 'Tory cuts' attack would unravel during an election campaign.
Jimmy Kingsbury
March 25th, 2009 3:54pm Report this commentThe dimwitted could include 9,562,122 people who elected this government in 2005 and who may be registered to vote again on 3rd June 2010. They are all potentially dangerous.
RH
March 25th, 2009 3:59pm Report this commentCome on WBG, The statement is true and has sustained this government over many a year. It's not moronic to point out an essential fact the opposition to this bunch of charlatans must take into account in the forthcoming election campaign.
Sally Chatterjee
March 25th, 2009 4:03pm Report this commentOddly Osborne's slogan was "only millionaires will pay inheritance tax", the very opposite of a millionaires manifesto. If this is the best Labour can do, it's "CON GAIN" on election night.
kinglear
March 25th, 2009 4:08pm Report this commentWBG - Anyone who votes Labour
CS
March 25th, 2009 4:12pm Report this commentExactly, WBG. The toffs line of attack was even cruder and failed pathetically.
If Labour accuse the Tories of favouring millionaires, all the Tories have to do is ask who knighted Fred Goodwin and approved his pension.
Chuck Unsworth
March 25th, 2009 4:14pm Report this commentWhat of Harman's own personal wealth? She must be a millionaire herself. These Pakenhams are all the same - full of themselves and uncaring of others.
Simon
March 25th, 2009 4:29pm Report this comment"So there it is. Labour’s pitch to the voters is crude, narrow, wilfully inaccurate and bound to appeal most to the most dimwitted. It, therefore, has a high chance of electoral success" How arrogant!
Lee Craven
March 25th, 2009 4:46pm Report this commenti'M A Labour voter and memeber and I am not dimwitted. I have a Bsc in social sciences and I am doing a masters in sociology. I know what the conservaties atand for and thats why I am Labour
George Laird
March 25th, 2009 4:55pm Report this commentDear Tories
If you wish to appeal to the voters to vote your middle class millionaire Oxford clique into Government then you should stop calling your potential voters dimwitted.
If they vote for you this time does that still make them dimwitted?
This isn't a great sales tactic.
Yours sincerely
George Laird
The Campaign for Human Rights at Glasgow University
David Ossitt
March 25th, 2009 4:59pm Report this commentI do not; unlike many have too much time for Vince Cable, to me he is still an old style socialist but then most of the Lib Dems are but he does have the habit of comming up with some excellent sound bites.
Todays:-
‘The Bank of England’s governor has sent his tanks down the Mall, seized control of economy and put the government under house arrest.’
Was a superb example.
George Laird
March 25th, 2009 5:05pm Report this commentDear Lee Craven
If you are going to pretend to be a Labour voter; you should have taken the time to have made your post grammatically correct.
The over use of spelling mistakes killed it for you.
If you want to be smart you should have limited it to two mistakes rather than the half dozen or so in the piece.
All this looks like to the dim witted et al is a Tory halfwit trying to pretend to be working class.
Yours sincerely
George Laird
The Campaign for Human Rights at Glasgow University
Mike, Brighton
March 25th, 2009 5:08pm Report this commentLee Craven - it appears that you are unable to spell or punctuate correctly. A common affliction of dimwitted Labour supporters.
What do the Tories stand for that you don't like? Not employing sociology graduates in the public sector at hugely inflated salaries to push paper around on diversity strategies and other worthless unproductive tasks??
Fergus Pickering
March 25th, 2009 5:12pm Report this commentWell OF COURSE Lee Craven, if you're doing a masters in sociology you're a Labour supporter. Do you ever meet the other kind? My road's full of them. A man who was a non-commissioned officer for thirty years and served in God knows how many countries, A man who worked nights all his working life, a man who is a law clerk and cycles to work every day. And their wives, all of whom work for a living. A fireman. I don't know whathiswife did but she's got a clutch of children and dogs. And there's Mrs Pickering. She taught in a university all her working life and pretty well never missed a day. I'm the only dodgy one - but at least I never studied sociology. That's ten votes for the dreadful Tories. Would YOU buy a used car from any one of the Labour Front Bench? Would you REALLY?
mac
March 25th, 2009 5:13pm Report this commentGood-o, Lee Craven.
Splendid credentials for a comfortable state sector career.
P. Edant
March 25th, 2009 5:19pm Report this commentLC - How about doing a GCSE in an Indo-European language belonging to the West Germanic branch; perhaps the official language of Britain and the United States and most of the Commonwealth countries? Or did this dimwit miss the point?
anon
March 25th, 2009 5:21pm Report this commentLee Craven,
It would help if you learned to spell or type!
Bert
March 25th, 2009 5:31pm Report this commentLee Craven
With those qualifications and that grammar you really had to be Labour. Plenty of dimwits get degrees these days.
By the way, what do the Conservaties atand for?
JONNY
March 25th, 2009 5:32pm Report this comment'I know what the conservaties atand for and thats why I am Labour'
Uh.. yes. I think I dimly get it.
Gareth
March 25th, 2009 5:34pm Report this commentLee Craven: You're not for real, surely? Undertaking a Master's degree and yet can manage to fit ten errors of grammar or spelling into two sentences?
GeoffH
March 25th, 2009 5:45pm Report this commentLee.
"I have a Bsc in social sciences and I am doing a masters in sociology."
So, that's two sheets off the toilet roll.
I know it's an old joke but given the incoherence of your contribution, it's about right, I think.
Pat
March 25th, 2009 5:47pm Report this commentLee Craven: perhaps you should stick to studying the English language and forget the social engineering.
john miller
March 25th, 2009 5:55pm Report this commentAhh, so Mandelson is STILL going to Brazil, eh? I thought he might have stopped going to that particular location by now.
TomTom
March 25th, 2009 6:09pm Report this commentHarman is also related to Neville Chamberlain, Conservative Chancellor who cleaned up the mess left by Philip Snowden, Labour's "Iron Chancellor" in 1931.
Chamberlain was a micro-manager who controlled every department under Baldwin, but when he became Prime Minister in 1937 he was a disaster in foreign policy.....sound familiar Gordon ?
JONNY
March 25th, 2009 6:30pm Report this comment'All this looks like to the dim witted et al is a Tory halfwit trying to pretend to be working class.'
Tory half-wit or Labour -
at least Mr Laird he has a certain gift of brevity.
Not always encountered North o' the Border.
Athesius the Facilitator
March 25th, 2009 7:18pm Report this commentLee Craven: You seem to me like a young apprentice in the RN. You can tell us all the square root of a jam jar but can't take the lid off. But do vote Labour, why not. But before you do go on to youtube and watch Danial Hannans speech at the Euro Parliament
David Ossitt
March 25th, 2009 7:50pm Report this commentLee Craven
I am sure that you are a particularly fine example of
Anthony Charles Lynton Blair's
education education education.
Do you mind telling the rest of us just what you will do with your 'masters in sociology' if you get it?
Jonjo
March 25th, 2009 9:23pm Report this commentI am a dimwit, I will vote for the monkey with the red rosette.
Liam
March 26th, 2009 1:22am Report this commentIt really says somethings about the elitism of this blog that someone can get away with using the word 'dimwitted' about the British electorate.
This at the same time as defending a policy of giving money from those of us who need it most to those who need it least.
I cannot believe this passes as serious debate.
David Ossitt
March 26th, 2009 9:36am Report this commentLiam.
'It really says somethings about the elitism of this blog that someone can get away with using the word 'dimwitted' about the British electorate'.
Liam; elitism?
Are you letting your inferiority complex show?
Many of the electorate are dimwitted; in that they will cast their vote for the 'proverbial monkey' if he or she wears a red ribbon.
The debate here is as serious; or as flippant, as your mood and inclination are, at the time of writing your post.
We can all defend or attack any policy; would it not be very boring if it were otherwise?
Back to top