Harman holds her own at PMQs
Peter Hoskin 1:36pm
A bit of a damp squib, really. Harman held her own against those PMQs titans that are Hague and Cable. And all my anticipatory drooling was for nought.
Hague opened by congratulating Harman on being the first female Labour MP to lead the House at PMQs. An invite for Harman’s only cringeworthy moment, as she inquired why Theresa May wasn’t opposing her. She suddenly came over all Oprah-esque – handing out “sisterly advice” and asking whether Tory women are to be “seen but not heard”.
The patented Hague Joke soon followed, and it was a good one. If Harman dons the appropriate attire for all occasions – a stab-vest when touring the mean streets of London; a hard hat on a building site – does she dress as a clown for Cabinet meetings? But she was equal to it – responding that she wouldn’t take fashion advice from Hague. A dig at his baseball-capped past.
She repeats the “I won’t take lectures from you” approach for Hague’s next question. What of the millions of low income earners who’ll be worse off after the after the 10p tax band gets eradicated this weekend? “I won’t take lectures from someone who opposed the minimum wage”. Not great, but it served its purpose for Harman. Hague was right to make the attack, though – and the Government will have to come up with a better response once all those low income earners start to feel the pinch.
Despite the cheers as he stood up, Cable’s attack was scuppered from the start. He led with a question on the Royal Family, which was immediately overruled by the Speaker. A subsequent question just enabled Harman to parrot the same old line about Labour and “economic stability”. Very disappointing.
The questions from the backbenches were either unchallenging (“Will you join me in condoning…?”) or were batted away with promises to forward it to the Prime Minister or the Chancellor. Maybe she just didn’t have the stomach to dish out the Brownies. Nonetheless, still a relief when it was all over.
In the end, then, a score draw between Harman and Hague, with Cable left out of the running. But as CoffeeHouser Kevyn Bodman rightly points out, that leaves Harman as the victor.
Previous
Comments
Dave B
April 2nd, 2008 2:17pmMatthew Parris did a short piece for Radio 4 on political speech writing a while back; as I recall the 'I'll take no lectures....' line, was filed under 'desperate', 'no answer available'.
Oscar Miller
April 2nd, 2008 4:12pmI think Hague won on substance (a view backed up by Michael Crick's verdict on the DP) but lost out on the funny stuff. Who'd have thunk it?
Max Kaye
April 2nd, 2008 5:00pmHague was, sensibly, being gentle on Harman. It may be great fun, but there is no real political benefit in being seen as a big bully - especially against 'disadvantaged' folk (A lesson Brown has never learnt).
Tiberius
April 2nd, 2008 5:04pmWell done, Harriet. Dispense with the hand-wringing and ideological nonsense and you could be a politician to bring something helpful to a country in need.
Jessica
April 2nd, 2008 5:18pmYou must be joking Harman was terrible and cringeworthy.
Danielle
April 2nd, 2008 5:20pmHarman is not a good representative of women, she is boring and plays the gender card at the slightest thing.
Bernard from Horsham
April 2nd, 2008 5:55pmI thought Hsrman was awful, the Harriet onthe (high) street was the funniest thing I have heard in ages. Does that woman have any idea about the political realities of presentation?
Kirsty
April 2nd, 2008 7:31pmWhy are you concentrating on the irrelevent fluff and not the substance of Hagues questions, which is much more important to te electorate. I never ever thought the day would come when it was a LABOUR government doubling the tax rate on the poorest workers whilst simultaneously allowing this country to became a magnet for the worlds obscenely weathly because of favourable tax rates. What a disgrace, the tories should go in hard on this and try and show the electorate they have changed and it is Conservatives not Labour that want to close the in equality gap and leave jokes to professional comedians.
salieri
April 2nd, 2008 8:53pmStrident is the only word. She can't help being lobotomised, poor dear. Her sense of the need for an occasional light touch makes McBean seem like Dave Allen in comparison, God help us. Is there a ghastlier woman in public life?
CS
April 2nd, 2008 11:02pmWhy wasn't Theresa May doing PMQs? Duh - cos you're doing PMQs, Harriet, not Leader of the House questions.
I really think that Hague should have ditched the attempt at the funnies and, given yesterday's golden opportunity, asked her straight out if the streets of London are safer now than in 1997. And, if she says they are safer, then why was she.....etc
Laurence, Chiswick
April 2nd, 2008 11:33pmI had expected far more from William Hague, but his softcocked performance in giving an egregious person a good kicking casts doubt on the quality of Parliamentary debate to which we might look forward.
When Harman said "Women are to be seen and not heard", didn't anyone else think he should have said: "In your case, neither - loov"?
On the other hand, spare her a thought - when she went for that walk she was the only upper-middle class person in her constituency. Bound to stick out.
DougS
April 3rd, 2008 12:31amThe pros seem to be calling it a tie . . . and therefore a "win" for The Horrible Hypocrite Harridan Harman. We amateurs, here and elsewhere, are at least mixed in our assessment.
I'd say Hague took it, and pretty clearly. He remained a gentlemen but got in some telling wisecracks . . . along with some solid criticism on policy.
Both the jokes and the substance hit home and made her look awkward, nervous and at times on the verge of a (mild) hysteria.
It's true, though: It really has become a close-to-nonsense jousting match: who can do the best stand-up routine. And, as always, the "honorable" Mr. Speaker didn't require The Horrible Hypocrite Harridan Harman to actually answer any of Hague's questions. God forbid!
Verity
April 3rd, 2008 1:31amLaurence, Chiswick: "When Harman said 'Women are to be seen and not heard', didn't anyone else think he should have said: "In your case, neither - loov"?"
Is this considered debate in your household? Where you think patronising an elected MP by coming out with low-rent patronisation and by calling out a pub jibe is rather clever?
Do you think William Hague won his reputation for debate by drooling out pub jibes?
Nick Kaplan
April 3rd, 2008 1:31amIt always worries me when people such as Kirsty use the term “obscenely wealthy,” it smacks of the kind of envy politics that is such a characteristic of the left who for some reason see being successful as a crime rather than an achievement. Kirsty, do you not understand that the “obscenely wealthy” who are attracted here by ‘favourable taxes’ create a huge amount of both jobs and wealth? The second the Tories start talking about addressing these ‘problems’ and reducing the equality gap, as you suggest, they will lose their core vote of apparitional individuals who value, rather than condemn achievement.
Kirsty
April 3rd, 2008 3:10pmNICK KAPLAN, the obscenely wealthy (mainly non doms) do not pay tax in this country!