Cameron drops the Hoon bomb in PMQs
Fraser Nelson 3:22pm
With a little help from the Daily Telegraph, David Cameron staged an ambush for Gordon Brown at PMQs today – the letter to Keith Vaz from Geoff Hoon promising he will be “rewarded” for supporting the government. It went up on the Telegraph website just before midday, and either David Cameron’s Blackberry is working with efficient speed or he had advance notice. Certainly more notice than Brown who was stuffed. Poor Hoon tried to look composed, knowing the television cameras would be turning to him. But his face went beetroot red, as Cameron read out his letter to Vaz. “I wanted you to know how much I appreciated all your help ... I trust that it will be appropriately rewarded!” It was a gotcha moment.
As Brown was saying Mr Vaz supported the legislation because he believed to be right, a strange moment then set in. It looked as if Brown was looking for an intervention from the backbenches, which of course you can’t do at PMQs. Then Michael Martin decided Brown had spoken, that Cameron didn’t have a follow-up, and it went straight on to another backbench question. Tories looked around puzzled: what had happened? They were mid-ambush. No one knew. Bungling Mr Martin had let Brown off the hook.
Just as well for him. He was back in fine word-mangling form, referring to his boozy Iraqi aunt “Alcky Eda” and being outclassed by Nick Clegg who is starting to get the hang of PMQs. He’s finally stopped his Mr Angry act and complained about a two-tier mental health provision on the NHS. (Alan Milburn used to say that he’d be happy with two tier – the NHS service was so unequal and served the poor so badly it was multi-tier). An extra £1.1bn has been spent on mental health said Brown, as if this was a defence. “He's doing it again, he's confusing a list with action” says Clegg. Bang on - confusing motion with progress is a main defect of this government.
When Cameron came back, he went on reoffending lags on early release. Brown reeled off statistics, again saying it was “quite wrong” to say he refused to build more prisons as he in fact “increased prison population from 60,000 to 80,000”. As everyone knows, this isn’t the point. Deplorably, he failed failure to accommodate the Home Office’s own projections. This brilliant post from Wat Tyler shows how the prisons problem was both predictable and predicted.
Cameron was having none of it. “It is no consolation to the victims of this violence that he reads out this list of completely irrelevant figures,” he said. Both he and Clegg are right to do this. In Brown’s head, these figures are programmed into the public’s mind, and make arguments in themselves. In truth, voters make no sense of this statistical babble. You do sometimes wonder if this is the only song Brown can sing.
Labour MPs were fairly upbeat, though, and loved Brown’s little peroration which he prepared for Cameron’s last question. "They talk tough on terrorism and act soft... Whenever big decisions are made, they duck the big issues” etc. Labour MPs made that strange sound when the “o” in “more” is held as if in a bad Welsh choir and resonates around the chamber.
"Robert Mugabe is a brutal thug" says Chris Bryant and compares him to Pinochet in Chile. Em, I think Bryant will find that Pinochet resigned in 1988 when he lost a referendum on his rule – and Mugabe is holding on no matter what. I note how these lefties always use Pinochet as the bête noire rather than choosing one of the many leftist dictators – like Castro, for example. For more on Castro v Pinochet see here. And for all Pinochet’s brutality, which country is in better health today: Cuba or Chile?
Stephen Crabb asked if Brown will go to Glasgow East - Brown’s response was pathetic. “He's got the chance to ask about any issue.... Once again they have resorted to trivia when they could ask sensible and serious questions”. Now and again, you wonder what Blair would have said. “He should know that Prime Ministers never campaign in by-elections, so it’s a daft question. But the rule doesn’t cover former Prime Ministers so if John Major wants to come and campaign in Glasgow East to remind them what they’re missing, he’d be more than welcome.” Except Blair would have been wittier.
In spite of this, I will again incur all your wrath by saying I’ve seen a lot better from Cameron and that Brown’s performance was not amongst his worst and his troops left quite happy – before the significance of the Vaz letter sank in.
Previous
kinglear
July 2nd, 2008 3:38pm Report this commentDC is deliberately keeping Brown in place. And Martin is not daft - he KNEW the letter issue was toxic and defused it
Tim
July 2nd, 2008 3:38pm Report this commentI dont think Martin bungled it. He saved Brown from the abyss.
Chris SE9
July 2nd, 2008 3:39pm Report this commentThe Vaz letter is only significant in that GB was unaware of it and caught on the hop by DC who had no doubt been tipped off by his friends on the Telegraph Online. The hand written note is obviously a tongue in cheek joke between colleagues. Any real deals and stitch ups would never see the light of day in writing. Just more trivial fun and games for the politicos whilst the haulage workers mounting their campaign outside Parliament were totally ignored.
Tiberius
July 2nd, 2008 3:51pm Report this commentI know you go into your PMQs report, Fraser, with Cameron's oratory handicap at your side, but surely, like me, you winced at how hard he hit Brown over crime.
Kevyn Bodman
July 2nd, 2008 3:51pm Report this commentI thought Cameron did very well today.
More 'bottom' and less knockabout.
Two questions:
Why was Paul Murphy being punished by being made to sit next to the PM? He's been close by in the last couple of weeks too.
Who was that balding, bespectaled backbencher asking about Scotland? The one of Asian origin.
If he was put up to make Brown look fluent then they should have got him on at the start, not the end.
DT
July 2nd, 2008 4:06pm Report this commentClearly Cameron had decided on two topics with three questions on each.
He had asked his third on Vaz. Brown was responding saying if DC had any allegations ... when Speaker rose to rebuke a noisly labour backbencher. Brown properly sat down. Speaker then turned back to Brown and said Prime Minister, inviting him to complete his answer. Brown did not move and the Speaker moved on to another question.
The story is that Brown was just so glad to escape.
Paul Williams
July 2nd, 2008 4:07pm Report this comment"Bungling Mr Martin had let Brown off the hook" or was it just being biased?
It's been very clear after watching PMQs for quite some time that Mr Martin is the latter - blatantly biased towards Labour.
SJH
July 2nd, 2008 4:11pm Report this commentThe answer to Stephen Crabb's question contained Brown's now stock response to any question which highlights any critical view of him: namely, "you have a chance to ask a question of substance but here you are retailing trivia etc". The obvious response is: well, if you ever responded to a straight question on substance with a straight answer of substance it might be worth asking them.
Even today, when he seemed to do so for the first time with a simple "yes" to Cameron's enquiry as to whether he could confirm that no deals had been done on the 42-day detention issue, Cameron's Hoon-Vaz chaser revealed how illusory even a Brown straight answer appears to be.
Robert Williams
July 2nd, 2008 4:25pm Report this commentA question about an election is trivial, but not, for example, a question asking Brown if he wants to celebrate the life & work of Gordon Banks & Stoke City football team (Q from a Labour MP for Stoke). Almost all Labour backbench questions are no more than an invitation to Brown to rattle off traKtor production statistics.
David C
July 2nd, 2008 4:46pm Report this commentDT:
Martin messed up the Q. from M Sarwar. He was asking about Scottish Executive funding of a Science Park.
I believe this is a devolved matter and should not be subject of PMQs.
Martin is not versed in procedure, is biased and appears to have no respect for the office he holds.
He is damaging Parliament.
David Lindsay
July 2nd, 2008 4:59pm Report this commentCan anyone suggest exactly how voting to allow people to be banged up without charge (not trial, charge) for six weeks might be "appropriately rewarded"?
Short the UK
July 2nd, 2008 6:33pm Report this commentBrown looks very ill. The darkenss around his eyes is almost pitch black. His face looks very white and lacks fresh blood circulation. He needs to see a Doctor and take a seriuosly long holiday. He is killing himself.
Jack R
July 2nd, 2008 6:38pm Report this commentCameron doesn't seem to pick the strongest targets on which to take on devious Brown.
Instead of the recidivist 'old lags' stuff, Cameron could have led on e.g. the need to reduce fuel duty (not merely to postpone 2p increase), and not to impose retrospective high car tax increases in UK. motorists.
Bocephus
July 2nd, 2008 6:49pm Report this commentMartin clearly asked Brown to finish his answer. Brown just sat there leaving the Speaker no option but to move on to the next question. If Dave thought he had Brown on the ropes surely he could have indicated that he wanted to continue asking another 3 questions on the subject?
Tanuki
July 2nd, 2008 7:00pm Report this commentWatching the clips of today's PMQ I really think that Gordon Brown has some sort of inadequately-treated obsessive-compulsive disorder. Perhaps NICE are denying him access to the correct medication.....
TrevorH
July 2nd, 2008 10:28pm Report this comment"Cameron could have led on e.g. the need to reduce fuel duty " -- but this would create a rod for Cameron's and the Tories back. Are they (we - 'cos I am a Conservative) going to reduce fuel duty?
We are going to inherit an economic mess - lets look at taxation and spend at the right time -not hold a hostage to fortune.
Shocking I know, but I believe this is called politics.
Philip Martin
July 2nd, 2008 11:09pm Report this commentWell, well...no-one picked up on Fraser's 'defence' of Pinochet...Fraser you don't have to choose...and as a journalist you certainly don't need to do trade-offs. Shame.
Silent Hunter
July 3rd, 2008 1:27am Report this commentSorry! Bungling? Speaker Martin?
NO! That was political bias...writ large to get Brown off the hook.
Good to see Chris from Section E9 of the New Labour politburo doing sterling work for the Thought Police on the blogs.
What a New Nasty Party prole that man is. LOL
Bruno Canales Contreras
July 3rd, 2008 6:46am Report this commentAs a chilean i defend Fraser´s line of reasoning, the repression was indeed tame by more horrific standards. Unlike other South American countries, however, Chile was a fairly tranquil, longstanding democracy - if caught in the tug and pull of the cold war. The ferocity of the repression and ghastly disappearance of civilians was as foreign as the threat it meant to neutralise, it was beastly and repulsed chileans left and right. The economic reforms were necessary in hindsight but at tremendous human cost, it must be noted. To his credit Pinochet did relinquish power in a proper manner, but not before siphoning off loads of money to his bank accounts.
John
July 3rd, 2008 9:17am Report this commentPOOR Hoon???? Couldn't happen to a nicer slimeball and a pig at the trough.
BUNGLING Gorbals??? Another slimeball who is blatantly abusing his position. The worst excuse for a speaker in 100 years.
John
July 3rd, 2008 9:19am Report this comment"The hand written note is obviously a tongue in cheek joke between colleagues" -
yeah, right. And we are not being misruled by the worst, most crooked, most incompetent PM in 70 years.
You wouldn't be Mrs McBroon by any chance, would you?
Adam McNestrie
July 3rd, 2008 9:25am Report this commentI think that people are naive not to expect a little log-rolling in parliamentary politics. The whole foundation of governmental majorities is based on this in a way. Office-holders vote with the government and those who would like to hold office do the same. For some reason this seems like "pardonable" loyalty, but anything that makes the link more explicit produces outrage.
To read more of my views link to my blog, Just who the hell are we?, on wordpress.com:
http://adammcnestrie.wordpress.com/
The Laughing Cavalier
July 3rd, 2008 9:34am Report this commentThe question I would like to see asked of Mr Brown is how many tractors were produced in the UK between 1997 and today. He'd probably answer it, deadpan, with a string of numbers.
Silent Hunter
July 3rd, 2008 3:26pm Report this commentAdam McNestrie;
By 'a little log rolling' do you in fact mean that it's acceptable to have 'a certain amount of sleaze' in our political process?
I can't help but think that if YOU were short changed in a shop, you would be the type of person to create a huge scene about it!
Even when it's only a 'little sleaze'...........LOL
Frankly, why should anyone in their right mind bother themselves to massage your ego by reading your blog......as if it has anything more to tell us about you than the garbage you write both here and on the Guardian blog.
Dull.....As.......Ditchwater!
Silent Hunter
July 3rd, 2008 3:29pm Report this commentIsn't it telling that the New Labour Blog Plant known to us as 'Chris SE9' hasn't revisited this thread.
You will notice that he pops up all over the blogs with single Pro New Labour posts to try and fool us into thinking that there really are still New Nasty Party supporters out there.
Hah!
Back to top