Cameron takes charge at PMQs
Fraser Nelson 1:32pm
Brown looked dejected, buffeted and battered by events. Cameron looked confident, in charge of them. The Tory leader kicked off asking why all new claims can’t be put online? (Ben Wallace did so ages ago, and was hated by many in his party, but Cameron backed him). Brown’s response was in auto-garble, speaking as if reading the small print from an insurance advert. "We need to have outside bodies" – what difference in the language they use.
Problem is, the second homes allowance is just one scam. Cameron then went to another one: what about the “communications allowance?” It’s a mechanism to allow Labour MPs in marginal seats to respond to Lord Ashcroft’s marginal seat campaign funding. Brown uttered something non-committal, then Cameron came back: in this time of austerity, "how does he justify the £10,000 communications allowance?" Brown then dons the hair shirt. "I have myself refused the pension that is able to be given to any serving PM" – well, the pension is given to retired PMs and, actually, he hasn’t refused it. And it’s open to the house to change communication allowance, Brown says. Not my fault.
Of course it’s open to the house, Cameron says, but "what we need is some leadership." Precisely right. He then moves on to another problem: the number of MPs. Westminster has one MP for every 94,000 people – it’s one of the most politician-saturated countries in the world. Brown says "these are matters that have to go before an independent commission" – again, the very get-out clause that Cameron was hounding him for. There followed a weird moment, where Cameron was retorting and heard Labour MPs jeer him. He stopped speaking, looked at Michael Martin and gestured towards the noisy rebels with his head. On cue, Martin shushed them. Heel, boy, heel.
Cameron continued: "I wonder if they need an independent commission to work out if they want tea or coffee in the morning ... Isn’t it time to see ourselves as the rest of the country sees us? How can we bring about the change the country needs if we cannot change ourselves?" And, yes, we all know this last bit was inspired by the rhetoric of a famous black American*. Brown responds with his father-of-the-nation card ("I am sorry that he has chosen today to divide on issues"). Strange, once Brown choked on the s-word - now he says it all the time. Anyway, his defence: "Leadership is me saying to all the political parties that they have to act now and immediately." No, Prime Minister, that is asking for leadership. He really doesn’t get it.
Now, Clegg. He mentions the Gurkhas – of course! – but then to business. His problem is the !biggest loophole of all – MPs making hundreds and thousands of pounds buying and selling property funded by the taxpayer." I agree with Clegg on this, and can’t see why MPs cant be housed as military officers are – i.e. given decent, but not excessive, accommodation on which they’re not allowed to make a penny of profit or furnish like palaces at taxpayers’ expense. Clegg should be careful, though, because if he wants MPs to repay capital gains than it follows they should be refunded for capital losses.
Roger Williams (Lib Dem, Brecon & Radnorshire) says that 100,000 will leave the countryside “because of lack of affordable housing”. Brown say he’ll help: he’s certainly fulfilled his promise to make housing more affordable. Prices are off 15%.
Tony Wright asked Brown to ask Cameron to accept whatever the Kelly Commission says. Theresa May had refused to when he was up against her on Newsnight last night, and he evidently smelled blood. Brown was non-committal, saying he hoped Kelly would come up with a report that he could support. So, Tony, forget about Theresa May. Brown doesn't agree with you.
Wonderful moment form Dennis Skinner, who said that the “sunny uplands” of the economy are in sight. That’s what John Major said, too. And I suspect Brown will be heading for an even more spectacular defeat.
* “If you wanna make the world a better place/take a look at yourself and make a change” - Man in the Mirror, 1988
Previous
ade
May 13th, 2009 1:58pm Report this commentI disagree, Browns point is that Parliament has to decide and it will take time. Cameron was playing to the media and suggesting these things can be decided on the spur of the moment and the communication expenses bit was pointless.
As for MP numbers, if the country expects MPs to run all the govt depts then you need plenty of MPs to choose from. Currently Brown has to make people Lords in order to fill the posts as he has a worn out party.
The whole scandal is small change in terms of government waste and too much time is spent on it
Peter Kenyon
May 13th, 2009 2:06pm Report this commentDear Fraser
Are you a leadership fetishist?
After Thatcher and Blair, we could all do with a little more inclusivity and consensus. What more appropriate occasion for it than the restoration of public trust in our parliamentary democracy.
That's not going to be achieved by either Brown, Cameron or Clegg barking orders.
We are all involved in this. I say that with feeling as a Labour Party member who has been campaigning for six years so far to save the Labour Party as an ethical, solvent, democratically-run, mass membership organisation.
BTW last summer I was elected to the Labour Party NEC by the constituency section.
You can follow my musings here:
http://petergkenyon.typepad.com/peterkenyon/
Victor, NW Kent
May 13th, 2009 2:06pm Report this commentFraser
Than you - I thought that I heard Brown make that claim about his pension but could not believe that he should make such a silly statement out of the blue.
As he wearily dragged himself to his feet at every question it was apparent that he has had enough. He really should quit but what will he live on now that he has refused his pension?
Will the IMF or World Bank accept him? Is there a vacant Commissioner's post in Europe? Does he have an offer from the UN? So perhaps he can't quit - he needs the salary, and extra for the cleaner.
Not the ususla biased poster
May 13th, 2009 2:26pm Report this commentI don't know why I read your reports on PMQ's it is so biaes you should title it Ankles...as in all you can see of me is my ankles I am that far up Cameron.
No mater what he says, you say it was masterful. I wonder how you can type when you are tugging so much.
I hope Cameron has claimed for the tissues you use in his expenses.
Mark
May 13th, 2009 2:30pm Report this commentNonsense ade, if there was ever a man to (clumsily) play to the media and throw up a smelly fog to try to obscure events, then that man is Brown, where have you been since the start of his rubbish reign?
mac
May 13th, 2009 2:31pm Report this commentAde,
If we could dispense with the utterly unnecessary extra ministers and their drone-PPS' created since 1997 by New Labour's desire to give even more money and perks to their obedient parliamentary flock, the current number of lobby fodder troughers could be reduced.
Dorothy Wilson
May 13th, 2009 2:31pm Report this commentSo however much MPs fiddle while Rome burns, however angry the people who pay the bills, ie the taxpayers, however inept the PM, we must wait for any action while Parliament decides what to do. As it is "Parliament" - or at least the MPs and Peers who make up Parliament - who have benefitted from the expenses fiddle we can hardly expect them to do anything but take their time.
Cameron spoke for the people. Brown cowered.
I've always said Brown will end up with a breakdown. There was nothing in his performance today to change my mind.
Fox in a box
May 13th, 2009 2:36pm Report this commentAde - surely 10 minutes to scribble a few notes on the back of a fag packet...10 minutes for a touch up of the old blusher...5 minutes to record the video (1 take, the old pro!)...5 minutes to upload it to Youtube and hey presto!! Nice one Gordon. Group hug in the bunker and back to striding the world stage like a colossus.
Tiberius
May 13th, 2009 2:38pm Report this commentIf Brown does follow Michael Jackson's advice (and is not wearing his skin toner), he will see that he needs to follow Steve Coppell's honourable course of action.
That would actually be a good thing for Martin to do also. And he might consider resigning to boot...
Denis Cooper
May 13th, 2009 2:38pm Report this comment"He then moves on to another problem: the number of MPs."
Of all the problems with MPs, their number is by far the least.
The fact that Cameron keeps harping on about cutting the number of MPs, and avoids proposing anything which might make those MPs better representatives of their constituents, should be a warning sign that he is not really interested in representative democracy.
It would be very different if he said, for example:
"I firmly believe that MPs should represent their constituents, not their parties; therefore I have decided that henceforth Conservative MPs shall always be free to vote as their consciences dictate.
I have today informed the Conservative whips that in the future their role will be inform Tory MPs about impending votes, and advise them of the party's official position in each case; but they will only be allowed to provide a recommendation, and will never attempt to issue an instruction, on how any MP should vote.
As Prime Minister I would propose the abolition of the extra salaries which are presently paid to senior whips, and I have asked Patrick McLoughlin and Andrew Robathan to voluntarily forgo their entitlements to extra salary, with immediate effect."
[The Opposition Chief Whip is paid £40,759 pa extra to make sure that Tory MPs, elected representatives of the people, will always follow the party line dictated by Cameron; the Deputy Opposition Chief Whip is paid £26,231 pa extra for assisting with that subversion of our democracy.]
TomTom
May 13th, 2009 2:48pm Report this comment"As for MP numbers, if the country expects MPs to run all the govt depts"
Not so. We have far too much local decision-making in Whitehall.
We do not need Junior Ministers - civil Servants can do many of these jobs.
We have TOO MANY Ministers and need to abolish departments such as whatever the Education Dept is now called.
We don't need DEFRA.
We certainly don't need the MoD and it should be scythed to render it responsive and less Byzantine.
The Home Office could usefully shrink.
Government seems to exist to fund political parties and provide employment for the lobby-fodder. This country is extraordinarily badly administered
Carl Marks
May 13th, 2009 3:02pm Report this commentVictor,
If, God permit, Brown should quit he can save on cleaning costs by taking on this new and in my view, much more fitting role himself. I see no reason why he should obtain any further state benefits or subsidies whether at the dole, in the Lords or in the EU either from me or any other long suffering taxpayer. Of course many of us have no pensions either, thanks directly to Brown. I will be happy though for our taxes to fund a one way ticket to Fife.
TrevorsDen
May 13th, 2009 3:12pm Report this commentGiven the dross we get in Parliament - there is a good case for having MORE Lords not less to fill the seats of governments.
But it also begs the question as to why we need so many ministers.
So NO - there is no need for as many MPs as we have now.
Ken
May 13th, 2009 3:19pm Report this commentPKeynon:
Frankly its Labour List that welcomes the luvvie duvvie brigade.
Leadership is indeed called for in a meltdown and parliament is in meltdown precisely because its leader - Mr Speaker -- is a pathetic placeman and party hack while the prime minister is an abject ditherer.
You don't win a war by committee.
Publius
May 13th, 2009 3:24pm Report this commentDenis Cooper. Well said. I fear though that your sensible comments will be dismissed as "unrealistic" -- which is the usual dismissal and excuse for ignoring obviously good ideas.
(It reminds me so much of the brush-offs given to those of us who warned of the coming credit crisis.)
Martyn Rowe
May 13th, 2009 3:24pm Report this commentDear Fraser.
Apologies for the 'personal' aspect of the question, but you get to see the man close-up.
But is Gordon Brown ill, or just extremely tired?
He looks dreadful. On TV last night talking to Jon Craig I couldn't believe how grey and gaunt he looked.
I don't ask this with any sinister glee, I just genuinely think the man looks unwell, and it would be interesting to know if this is being mentioned at all.
Martyn
Chuck Unsworth
May 13th, 2009 3:37pm Report this comment@ Peter Kenyon.
Just who do you suppose are 'we'? I'm sorry, these 'elected representatives' should certainly be in the business of setting an example. Perhaps that is exactly what we have seen far too much of in recent years - certainly over the past decade - a ghastly example. What we are witnessing now is the dying days of an entirely discredited regime - one which had the bare-faced effrontery to avow that it would put an end to sleaze, and then proved that it was not only infinitely more venal, but also grossly incompetent. I doubt that we shall see a Labour Government ever again. Socialism, in all its guises, has been destroyed by the very people who declared themselves supporters.
You plead for 'consensus'. There can be no 'consensus' over whether such racketeering is acceptable, plainly it is not - nor has it ever been to those outside of the Parliament Game who, despite the best efforts of MPs - notably the Government and its henchmen, have managed to lift the stone and expose the loathsome, sickening, putrid decay beneath. There can be no consensus over whether we should place the next several generations in debt, either - that in and of itself is true immorality.
'We are all involved'? Why 'we'? I view these people as contemptible toxic scum, to be avoided like the plague. I wish never to have to deal with them or their ilk again.
John Page
May 13th, 2009 3:51pm Report this commentHe could have said:
"L lead my party. He follows his."
Remember that? Bet he wishes he had.
So now will the Tories forgo their communications allowances? Paul Waugh has done some sums -
http://waugh.standard.co.uk/2009/05/tories-who-will-lose-out-from-axeing-comms-allowance.html
The Bellman
May 13th, 2009 4:29pm Report this commentMcSnotty: "Leadership is me telling people what to do." A moment, however rare or inadvertent, of clarity: a real glimpse into the mind of a psychopath. Once it would have been chilling, but now it seems merely contemptible, and not a little pathetic.
When leadership is reduced to this, you had better have some kind of credible sanction to back up the threat. But even the milksops in his own party aren't scared of him any more, so what chances of the opposition quailing before the clunking fist?
David Ossitt
May 13th, 2009 4:42pm Report this commentNot the ususla biased poster
May 13th, 2009 2:26pm
"I don't know why I read your reports on PMQ's it is so biaes you should title it Ankles...as in all you can see of me is my ankles I am that far up Cameron"
I think that I know who is behind the above nomdeplume; you are either that sh*t for brains Derik (call me Dolly) Draper or else that loathsome tripehound Damian McBride.
You certainly write and think like them; badly and very vulgar very rude.
Martin Cole
May 13th, 2009 5:16pm Report this commentBlair brought in legislation to seize the assets of those involved in organised crime, of which the mass misapplication of the rules on MP expenses seems to fit.
Such action avoids the pitfall of present potential property losses in Cleggs plan as mentioned above.
2trueblue
May 13th, 2009 6:25pm Report this commentCameron did well to set the mood, but I do not think the MPs have really grasped how angry and used the electorate are. They are fed up at being caught and still do not get it. We are fedup with the fact that they voted this system in and spet time and effort preventing us the right to see the detail.
I appreciate that they have to have some arrangement for their time in London but can not see the logic of us having to maintain THEIR choice of residence, that is where I disagree with the whole thing. They go up to Westminster and get the idea that they are more important than they are. They are there in our name.
George Laird
May 13th, 2009 6:41pm Report this commentDear Fraser
'Not the ususla biased poster' has written something funny in their moment of deep unhappiness.
He called you "Ankles".
Even in the deepest of the despair inadvertent humour flourishes.
David Ossitt thinks he might be Dolly Draper; I hardly think so, I would have though Draper would have had enough of computers.
Not wicked enough.
Yours sincerely
George Laird
The Campaign for Human Rights at Glasgow University
David Ossitt
May 13th, 2009 7:09pm Report this commentNot the ususla biased poster
Come on make your mind up; are you as above or as below?
Not the usual biased poster.
George Laird
May 13th, 2009 7:11pm Report this commentDear Martin Cole
“Blair brought in legislation to seize the assets of those involved in organised crime, of which the mass misapplication of the rules on MP expenses seems to fit”.
In order for it to be organised crime then surely you would have to prove conspiracy?
The fact is that in order to prove conspiracy you would have to include the staff of the Fees Office and the various House of Commons Committees to make it stick as a workable prosecution.
Do you think that is possible?
I certainly don’t think that is a runner.
The actuality of so many people abusing the rules doesn’t mean you can pin the organised crime tag on MPs’.
Even the ‘Harman Court of Public Opinion’ would throw that one out.
Yours sincerely
George Laird
The Campaign for Human Rights at Glasgow University
Sevo Slade
May 13th, 2009 10:28pm Report this commentWhat we need -- what Cameron could propose to REALLY shake things up and start to reduce the stink -- is an iron-clad law dictating that all Parliamentarians emerge from their protected bubble and sleep in the bed they've made for the rest of us. This means being subject to the same expenses, income tax, capital gains tax, stamp duty, VAT, customs & excise levies, and mortgage regulations as the rest of us; the same PENSIONS regime as the rest of us; send their children exclusively to state schools; take public transport and not taxis or chauffered cars; use the NHS exclusively and not private health care; and immediately put a stop to the hiring of spouses and other family members as "sectretaries" or "administrative assistants": Once they start to really feel the impact of the mess they've made of things on their own lives and those of their families, there may be the legitimate beginning of hope of better policies if only in purely their own self-interest -- something they have proved extremely efficient, energetic and creative in pursuing.
James
May 13th, 2009 10:57pm Report this comment"Leadership is me saying to the other parties..." No Gordon, that is not leadership, that is dictatorship. Leadership is bringing forward interesting and new proposals. Leadership is being willing to allow proper debate. Leadership is being prepared to admit that not all your ideas are the best ones. Leadership is something you haven't shown, won't show and, frankly, seem incapable of showing. Show leadership by firing Smith, Blears, Darling, Moran, Gardiner etc from the PLP. Show leadership by getting rid of the atrocious Speaker. Show leadership by recognising the Parliament in which you serve and the Government which you "lead" have lost all authority and dissolve Parliament. Seek a new mandate. Tell us why we should return Labour to power. Now that would be leadership. What's that? A flying pig?
jimmy
May 14th, 2009 9:52am Report this commentDear Frazer, Denis and Mr Kenyon, please read Polly Toynbee, and be realistic. One Labour peer said: 'The moral mask has been ripped from Brown'. McBride did Brown's work for years. Brown was the ideal socialist. The expenses scandal rips the moral mask from Labour as in control of the rules. Brown's a disaster. He has damaged UK morality and destroyed more UK wealth than WW2. He took the UK credit cards and maxed them several times. Now he wants UK credit cards charged to future taxpayers to max again. What do you say if your rebellious teen demands you again top up the credit card you gave them?
Denis Cooper
May 14th, 2009 2:06pm Report this commentYes, Jimmy, but I don't believe that Cameron would do anything to rectify the underlying flaws in our political system, and in fact on the evidence so far I believe that he would make them even worse. Who is he? How did he suddenly become the leader of his political gang? Why did he retain the services of a National Chairman who had set out to deprive the ordinary members of the right to have the final say on who would lead their gang, and why did he connive with that man to gerrymander the selection of their candidates for the EU Parliament elections? I'm sorry, but while I was initially prepared to give him the benefit of the doubt, I now see him as no better than Brown.
Back to top