Politics

[Craig 6682]

Couldn't see Red Ken as PM either tbh.

 

CT's tory love in is getting beyond a joke now like.

 

 

What do you expect from a Tory voter

 

Im still not sure what you are you seem to sway a lot with the wind

 

Anyway, the original comment was about the program which if your interested in politics, was very good. Having only read the Eton Toff stuff about Cameron, it was interesting to hear the facts from those that new him.

 

Just because you're a tory doesn't mean you can't be objective though. Take post 42 on here, why haven't you commented on the fact that Cameron fell on his arse after Bridget's question? It's of particular relevance to your locality after all.

 

It's far too early to tell if Cameron will make the grade as PM yet in any case, whatever your political stance. Yet you sound like you have a crush on him.

 

I tell you what Renton - being no fan of Cameron I'm still glad he gave the response he did rather than make something up on the spot (which we're all quick to know politicians for).

 

I do feel that he couldn't win in this situation tbh - unrealistic to expect him to there and then know the answer to every question that was thrown at him at the first PMQ (unless he had prior knowledge of what questions they'd be which, IMO would make a mockery of the whole event), had he answered definitively and guessed, most likely getting it wrong he'd have been forever berated for it so he gave the only answer he could given and still that's no right.

 

There's not liking the fella and what he stands for and there's the of prejudging everything he says with that sentiment.

 

What did you expect of him in reply to Bridget?

 

I'd like him to confirm the grant still stands and honour it, to protect private sector jobs in this region. Instead he said nothing. Is that acceptable? Can he just say 'dunno' to every question from now on? Is some reassurance not called for after his comments pre-election on his plans for the North East?

 

Btw, do you really think PMQs are off the cuff?

 

Off the cuff? Well you'd like to think so else what's the fucking point in them sitting in the house to carry it out? I'd suspect some knowledge of what's coming but not all.

 

As for the grant still standing - my opinion is that he honestly doesn't know. I bet the Chancellor does though! We all know cuts need to be made so it has to be considered that nothing is safe (I appreciate some things will be undoubtedly safer than others but that's the nature of politics and would be true whoever was in power).

 

I'd like him to find out and report back to the house with a true honest answer. I've always thought that the expectation for the PM to give a full definiitve answer at PMQ is way too high. By its very name its PMQ, not PMQ&A. Although the answers do need to be delivered expediently....

[donaldstott 0]

The "I'll look in to it and get back to the honourable member" response has been trotted out by PMs for years. It's nowt new.

 

TBF to cameron there is no way he can have a handle on every issue three weeks after taking office and I have respect for him for not bullshitting his way out of it.

[Christmas Tree 4725]

The "I'll look in to it and get back to the honourable member" response has been trotted out by PMs for years. It's nowt new.

 

TBF to cameron there is no way he can have a handle on every issue three weeks after taking office and I have respect for him for not bullshitting his way out of it.

 

 

Spot on

[NJS 4376]

Off the cuff? Well you'd like to think so else what's the fucking point in them sitting in the house to carry it out? I'd suspect some knowledge of what's coming but not all.

 

 

As I said, I think they do have advance knowledge - I thought it was designed to provoke debate rather than provide info.

 

Even if they don't, someone in that position should/would have a team who think "Ah MP, for Houghton and Sunderland, I wonder what she'll be asking" and wouldn't have to go a million miles to anticipate a question on jobs or even Nissan.

 

Of course it may be that they just haven't decided on the grant issue which would be fair enough in the timeframe and I wouldn't see anything wrong in him saying that - the fact that he averted the question suggests an answer he didn't want to give as I said.

Edited June 4, 2010 by NJS

[Renton 21552]

The "I'll look in to it and get back to the honourable member" response has been trotted out by PMs for years. It's nowt new.

 

TBF to cameron there is no way he can have a handle on every issue three weeks after taking office and I have respect for him for not bullshitting his way out of it.

 

 

Spot on

 

Hold on, I thought this was new, refreshing honesty from Cameron? Now its the same response that's been trotted out for years? You can't have it both ways.

 

Another thing about PMQs now is that there is effectively only one party asking questions. Which makes it easier for Cameron, and more boring for us.

[Craig 6682]

Off the cuff? Well you'd like to think so else what's the fucking point in them sitting in the house to carry it out? I'd suspect some knowledge of what's coming but not all.

 

 

As I said, I think they do have advance knowledge - I thought it was designed to provoke debate rather than provide info.

 

Even if they don't, someone in that position should/would have a team who think "Ah MP, for Houghton and Sunderland, I wonder what she'll be asking" and wouldn't have to go a million miles to anticipate a question on jobs or even Nissan.

 

Of course it may be that they just haven't decided on the grant issue which would be fair enough in the timeframe and I wouldn't see anything wrong in him saying that - the fact that he averted the question suggests an answer he didn't want to give as I said.

 

Or it could be that he just didn't know the answer. Like I said, I'm no fan of Cameron so I'm not defending him but at the same time I think he's being knocked a bit too hard on this particular subject.

 

As for the comment re: Houghton and Sunderland MP, we both know there's a great deal that goes on within that constituency besides the Nissan factory - granted it's the biggest industry.

[Craig 6682]

Another thing about PMQs now is that there is effectively only one party asking questions. Which makes it easier for Cameron, and more boring for us.

 

Sadly that was true whoever got in though...

[Renton 21552]

Off the cuff? Well you'd like to think so else what's the fucking point in them sitting in the house to carry it out? I'd suspect some knowledge of what's coming but not all.

 

 

As I said, I think they do have advance knowledge - I thought it was designed to provoke debate rather than provide info.

 

Even if they don't, someone in that position should/would have a team who think "Ah MP, for Houghton and Sunderland, I wonder what she'll be asking" and wouldn't have to go a million miles to anticipate a question on jobs or even Nissan.

 

Of course it may be that they just haven't decided on the grant issue which would be fair enough in the timeframe and I wouldn't see anything wrong in him saying that - the fact that he averted the question suggests an answer he didn't want to give as I said.

 

Or it could be that he just didn't know the answer. Like I said, I'm no fan of Cameron so I'm not defending him but at the same time I think he's being knocked a bit too hard on this particular subject.

 

As for the comment re: Houghton and Sunderland MP, we both know there's a great deal that goes on within that constituency besides the Nissan factory - granted it's the biggest industry.

 

Well like I said, his response to this particular question raised a few eyebrows on FiveLive. But whatever, it was no more than a competent performance, and certainly not worthy of the gushing of CT in #42, was my point.

[Craig 6682]

Off the cuff? Well you'd like to think so else what's the fucking point in them sitting in the house to carry it out? I'd suspect some knowledge of what's coming but not all.

 

 

As I said, I think they do have advance knowledge - I thought it was designed to provoke debate rather than provide info.

 

Even if they don't, someone in that position should/would have a team who think "Ah MP, for Houghton and Sunderland, I wonder what she'll be asking" and wouldn't have to go a million miles to anticipate a question on jobs or even Nissan.

 

Of course it may be that they just haven't decided on the grant issue which would be fair enough in the timeframe and I wouldn't see anything wrong in him saying that - the fact that he averted the question suggests an answer he didn't want to give as I said.

 

Or it could be that he just didn't know the answer. Like I said, I'm no fan of Cameron so I'm not defending him but at the same time I think he's being knocked a bit too hard on this particular subject.

 

As for the comment re: Houghton and Sunderland MP, we both know there's a great deal that goes on within that constituency besides the Nissan factory - granted it's the biggest industry.

 

Well like I said, his response to this particular question raised a few eyebrows on FiveLive. But whatever, it was no more than a competent performance, and certainly not worthy of the gushing of CT in #42, was my point.

 

Oh on that point I fully concur. But then we both know that there is serious rhetoric behind CT's political comments...

[Christmas Tree 4725]

Off the cuff? Well you'd like to think so else what's the fucking point in them sitting in the house to carry it out? I'd suspect some knowledge of what's coming but not all.

 

 

As I said, I think they do have advance knowledge - I thought it was designed to provoke debate rather than provide info.

 

Even if they don't, someone in that position should/would have a team who think "Ah MP, for Houghton and Sunderland, I wonder what she'll be asking" and wouldn't have to go a million miles to anticipate a question on jobs or even Nissan.

 

Of course it may be that they just haven't decided on the grant issue which would be fair enough in the timeframe and I wouldn't see anything wrong in him saying that - the fact that he averted the question suggests an answer he didn't want to give as I said.

 

 

They do not have advanced knowledge and are simply briefed by their staff on the big issues of the day. Up until now, most prime ministers have taken in reems of books to the dispatch box to rely on. Cameron has decided to take a few notes only (Soldiers names etc) and answer as best as he can. Virtually every question put to him this week he was very knowledgable on and could answer on.

 

The truth will most likely be that they havent fully decided on where all the cuts are going to be after a couple of weeks.

 

Having talked about the need for private industry to replace public sector jobs in the North East, I would be amazed if they cut this grant.

[Christmas Tree 4725]

Off the cuff? Well you'd like to think so else what's the fucking point in them sitting in the house to carry it out? I'd suspect some knowledge of what's coming but not all.

 

 

As I said, I think they do have advance knowledge - I thought it was designed to provoke debate rather than provide info.

 

Even if they don't, someone in that position should/would have a team who think "Ah MP, for Houghton and Sunderland, I wonder what she'll be asking" and wouldn't have to go a million miles to anticipate a question on jobs or even Nissan.

 

Of course it may be that they just haven't decided on the grant issue which would be fair enough in the timeframe and I wouldn't see anything wrong in him saying that - the fact that he averted the question suggests an answer he didn't want to give as I said.

 

Or it could be that he just didn't know the answer. Like I said, I'm no fan of Cameron so I'm not defending him but at the same time I think he's being knocked a bit too hard on this particular subject.

 

As for the comment re: Houghton and Sunderland MP, we both know there's a great deal that goes on within that constituency besides the Nissan factory - granted it's the biggest industry.

 

Well like I said, his response to this particular question raised a few eyebrows on FiveLive. But whatever, it was no more than a competent performance, and certainly not worthy of the gushing of CT in #42, was my point.

 

Well this is the report from the BBC on his first PMQ

 

 

Five years after his first performance at PMQs, David Cameron finally had the chance to face the questions rather than pose them.

 

But, this was not the jolly post-election political knock-about that some might have expected.

 

There were several reasons for this.

 

Most obviously, the shootings in Cumbria subdued the Commons. The raid on the Gaza ship, and more deaths in Afghanistan contributed to a much more sombre mood than had prevailed in the chamber after the Queen's Speech.

 

It is also important to remember that over a third of these MPs will never have attended prime minister's questions before.

 

Many will have been unsure how to behave while watching these fascinating, but strange, weekly bouts.

 

When to cheer? When to jeer? And aren't the rules for the "new" politics supposed to be somehow different from the "old"?

 

Clearly, PMQs in the age of coalition will take some time to bed down.

 

'Punch and Judy'

David Cameron seemed to want to present himself as a less overtly political prime minister than Gordon Brown.

 

When he first become opposition leader, he said he would end "Punch and Judy" politics in the Commons. That didn't last. But, Mr Cameron still likes to present himself as the serious, grown-up leader acting in the "national interest" at all times.

 

Hence, the prime minister's best moment today: "I am going to give accurate answers rather than make them up". There was a huge cheer from the government benches at this point - even from Liberal Democrats like Chris Huhne.

 

The role of the Lib Dems in these weekly clashes still is not totally clear.

 

Nick Clegg has become the silent man - the only leader of the three biggest parties who does not get to say anything at all (although he does seem to be offered the chance to tour TV and radio studios on the morning of big parliamentary events).

 

Today he sat in the Commons looking pretty comfortable.

 

At one point, he was licking his lips reflectively.

 

Sure-footed Harman

A few minutes later he prompted the prime minister about a policy detail.

 

Week in week out, he will be sitting to Mr Cameron's right.

 

But never cheering or laughing too enthusiastically for the comfort of his own MPs, and never patting Mr Cameron's back too vigorously when he sits down.

 

Other Liberal Democrats also seem a little unsure how to react to "their" prime minister.

 

There will, of course, now be obsessive discussion every week about where everyone is sitting.

 

Are the Lib Dem ministers huddled together or interspersed with their Tory partners?

 

As the weeks go by, we can also expect much more comment on the body language of the likes of Vince Cable, Chris Huhne, Danny Alexander etc, as Mr Cameron defends the government's actions.

 

What of Labour?

 

Harriet Harman put in another sure-footed Commons performance.

 

Though she was not as effective or funny as on the day of the Queen's Speech - when many were asking why she was not running for the Labour leadership.

 

But one thing is clear - particularly from her questions about tax breaks for married couples.

 

Labour's tactic week-in, week-out will be to try to tease out divisions between the Conservatives and the Liberal Democrats.

 

The opposition's aim at PMQs will be to expose these cracks in the coalition.

 

Their hope will be to make the silent Nick Clegg squirm.

[Renton 21552]

Conservative backbenchers and some Liberals cheered Cameron?

 

Aye, sorry, that's me told. You're right CT, Cameron is a genius and we're clearly in the dawn of a new era of politics, and everything will be great from now on.

 

[Christmas Tree 4725]

Couldn't see Red Ken as PM either tbh.

 

CT's tory love in is getting beyond a joke now like.

 

 

What do you expect from a Tory voter

 

Im still not sure what you are you seem to sway a lot with the wind

 

Anyway, the original comment was about the program which if your interested in politics, was very good. Having only read the Eton Toff stuff about Cameron, it was interesting to hear the facts from those that new him.

 

Just because you're a tory doesn't mean you can't be objective though. Take post 42 on here, why haven't you commented on the fact that Cameron fell on his arse after Bridget's question? It's of particular relevance to your locality after all.

 

It's far too early to tell if Cameron will make the grade as PM yet in any case, whatever your political stance. Yet you sound like you have a crush on him.

 

I tell you what Renton - being no fan of Cameron I'm still glad he gave the response he did rather than make something up on the spot (which we're all quick to know politicians for).

 

I do feel that he couldn't win in this situation tbh - unrealistic to expect him to there and then know the answer to every question that was thrown at him at the first PMQ (unless he had prior knowledge of what questions they'd be which, IMO would make a mockery of the whole event), had he answered definitively and guessed, most likely getting it wrong he'd have been forever berated for it so he gave the only answer he could given and still that's no right.

 

There's not liking the fella and what he stands for and there's the of prejudging everything he says with that sentiment.

 

What did you expect of him in reply to Bridget?

 

 

This is the problem unfortunately with Renton and others like him. So are so anti Cameron that they cant see any good and if he came out tomorrow and doubled the Nissan grant they would just move on to the next negative point.

 

There are many things I have liked that Labour have done over the years and just because I lean towards Tory, it doesnt make me so blinkered as to appreciate things like the minimum wage and winter fuel allowances as two examples. When Renton argues the way he does, it just makes him appear like one of these sheep who would vote for anything with a red rosette....or green or whatever he is.

 

At least I get the feeling with someone who detests the thatcher years, like NJS, is at least prepared to bring some objectivity to bare, even if it comes with a cloud of suspicion.

 

I would compare Rentons position in these threads to punch and judy politics in the house of commons. Every now and then a good argument but very little sensible discussion on politics.

[Christmas Tree 4725]

Personally I think I'm the most objective person on here when it comes to party politics

 

That's funny... you was saying something remarkably similar about me in another thread

 

 

I think you come a very strong second. But thats just your age.

[Renton 21552]

Couldn't see Red Ken as PM either tbh.

 

CT's tory love in is getting beyond a joke now like.

 

 

What do you expect from a Tory voter

 

Im still not sure what you are you seem to sway a lot with the wind

 

Anyway, the original comment was about the program which if your interested in politics, was very good. Having only read the Eton Toff stuff about Cameron, it was interesting to hear the facts from those that new him.

 

Just because you're a tory doesn't mean you can't be objective though. Take post 42 on here, why haven't you commented on the fact that Cameron fell on his arse after Bridget's question? It's of particular relevance to your locality after all.

 

It's far too early to tell if Cameron will make the grade as PM yet in any case, whatever your political stance. Yet you sound like you have a crush on him.

 

I tell you what Renton - being no fan of Cameron I'm still glad he gave the response he did rather than make something up on the spot (which we're all quick to know politicians for).

 

I do feel that he couldn't win in this situation tbh - unrealistic to expect him to there and then know the answer to every question that was thrown at him at the first PMQ (unless he had prior knowledge of what questions they'd be which, IMO would make a mockery of the whole event), had he answered definitively and guessed, most likely getting it wrong he'd have been forever berated for it so he gave the only answer he could given and still that's no right.

 

There's not liking the fella and what he stands for and there's the of prejudging everything he says with that sentiment.

 

What did you expect of him in reply to Bridget?

 

 

This is the problem unfortunately with Renton and others like him. So are so anti Cameron that they cant see any good and if he came out tomorrow and doubled the Nissan grant they would just move on to the next negative point.

 

There are many things I have liked that Labour have done over the years and just because I lean towards Tory, it doesnt make me so blinkered as to appreciate things like the minimum wage and winter fuel allowances as two examples. When Renton argues the way he does, it just makes him appear like one of these sheep who would vote for anything with a red rosette....or green or whatever he is.

 

At least I get the feeling with someone who detests the thatcher years, like NJS, is at least prepared to bring some objectivity to bare, even if it comes with a cloud of suspicion.

 

I would compare Rentons position in these threads to punch and judy politics in the house of commons. Every now and then a good argument but very little sensible discussion on politics.

 

Coming across as a bit obsessed about me there CT, you were even thinking about me today in the sunshine apparently.

 

I'm a card carrying Labour man, always have been, always will be most probably, although my socialist leanings have certainly softened over the years to be more pragmatic (much like New Labour). I don't mind admitting this, I'm not claiming to be anything else. More to the point, I don't want to be anything else - politics is by its very definition subjective. There's no right or wrong answer, there's no absolutes, everything is relative, nothing is quantifiable, and ultimately its all about your values and beliefs, and what type of country you want to live in. Or at least it should be. Anyway, I have to be completely objective in my work and that's enough for me thanks.

 

So no, I don't consider myself to be remotely balanced about partisan politics. But the difference between us is, I recognise this fact. You, who describe yourself as 'dyed in-the-wool tory', pretend you're not partisan, and worse, have the sheer audacity to claim you're somehow more objective than everyone else. You then simply ignore anyone who provides evidence to the contrary about this (not just me I might add). To sum up, you've got your head so far stuck up your own arse you simply have no self awareness at all.

 

Either that or you are just 100% WUM, like Fop was. Sad either way really.

[Monkeys Fist 42339]

Ka-Boom!!

Bombed.

Well put Renton.

[AgentAxeman 178]

I'm a card carrying Labour man, always have been, always will be most probably, although my socialist leanings have certainly softened over the years to be more pragmatic (much like New Labour). I don't mind admitting this, I'm not claiming to be anything else. More to the point, I don't want to be anything else - politics is by its very definition subjective. There's no right or wrong answer, there's no absolutes, everything is relative, nothing is quantifiable, and ultimately its all about your values and beliefs, and what type of country you want to live in. Or at least it should be. Anyway, I have to be completely objective in my work and that's enough for me thanks.

 

So no, I don't consider myself to be remotely balanced about partisan politics. But the difference between us is, I recognise this fact. You, who describe yourself as 'dyed in-the-wool tory', pretend you're not partisan, and worse, have the sheer audacity to claim you're somehow more objective than everyone else. You then simply ignore anyone who provides evidence to the contrary about this (not just me I might add). To sum up, you've got your head so far stuck up your own arse you simply have no self awareness at all.

 

 

Im confused Renton, I believed you when you said that you believed you were at the center of british politics not so long ago? now your saying you're staunch left wing?

 

So in other words, you were lying when you said that?? or have i got the wrong end of the stick here??

 

Will the real Renton please stand up, please stand up, please stand up............. etc.

 

 

tbh, Both CT and Renton are as bad as each other in this thread with neither willing to take a backward step.

[Christmas Tree 4725]

There's not liking the fella and what he stands for and there's the of prejudging everything he says with that sentiment.

 

Craig yesterday

 

 

This is what were discussing Renty before your card carrying speech.

 

I tried to clarify that I, while a Tory, can appreciate good policy and good politicians regardless of what party they come from.

 

Your bias seems unable to let you do the same, hence craigs comments.

[Renton 21552]

I'm a card carrying Labour man, always have been, always will be most probably, although my socialist leanings have certainly softened over the years to be more pragmatic (much like New Labour). I don't mind admitting this, I'm not claiming to be anything else. More to the point, I don't want to be anything else - politics is by its very definition subjective. There's no right or wrong answer, there's no absolutes, everything is relative, nothing is quantifiable, and ultimately its all about your values and beliefs, and what type of country you want to live in. Or at least it should be. Anyway, I have to be completely objective in my work and that's enough for me thanks.

 

So no, I don't consider myself to be remotely balanced about partisan politics. But the difference between us is, I recognise this fact. You, who describe yourself as 'dyed in-the-wool tory', pretend you're not partisan, and worse, have the sheer audacity to claim you're somehow more objective than everyone else. You then simply ignore anyone who provides evidence to the contrary about this (not just me I might add). To sum up, you've got your head so far stuck up your own arse you simply have no self awareness at all.

 

 

Im confused Renton, I believed you when you said that you believed you were at the center of british politics not so long ago? now your saying you're staunch left wing?

 

So in other words, you were lying when you said that?? or have i got the wrong end of the stick here??

 

Will the real Renton please stand up, please stand up, please stand up............. etc.

 

 

tbh, Both CT and Renton are as bad as each other in this thread with neither willing to take a backward step.

 

 

I would say I'm centre left in political persuasion. I don't really understand your point, if you even have one.

[Renton 21552]

There's not liking the fella and what he stands for and there's the of prejudging everything he says with that sentiment.

 

Craig yesterday

 

 

This is what were discussing Renty before your card carrying speech.

 

I tried to clarify that I, while a Tory, can appreciate good policy and good politicians regardless of what party they come from.

 

Your bias seems unable to let you do the same, hence craigs comments.

 

Not true at all. The Conservatives have had many great politicians, I fully recognise that. I just don't rate Cameron as one of them. As for your so-called objectivity, I have rated Cameron's PMQ session as 'adequate', which is probably in line with most professional commentators (I listened to it live as well I might add, not just the highlights which you did). You, in post 42 of this thread, gave a cringeworthy appraisal practically claiming that Cameron was the Messiah of the UK and politics. It should be obvious to everyone who is the more objective here - everyone apart from yourself of course.

[AgentAxeman 178]

I don't really understand your point, if you even have one.

 

 

christ man, pipe down! you're making a fool of yourself!

 

the point is Renton, you are deluded. you try and convince yourself that just because someone asked a question to which the questionee didnt know the answer is in some way a 'victory' or a 'meritous occasion' for the party of the questioner.

 

believe me it isnt a big deal or even an unusual occurance at PMQ.

 

[Renton 21552]

I don't really understand your point, if you even have one.

 

 

christ man, pipe down! you're making a fool of yourself!

 

the point is Renton, you are deluded. you try and convince yourself that just because someone asked a question to which the questionee didnt know the answer is in some way a 'victory' or a 'meritous occasion' for the party of the questioner.

 

believe me it isnt a big deal or even an unusual occurance at PMQ.

 

 

Well no actually. Firstly, I was defending myself from one of your typically unfounded comments, which I see you haven't bothered responded to. Hardly see how that means I am making a fool of myself, I am deluded, or that I need to pipe down.

 

As for the second, part, you have completely missed the point. I'm not saying it is unusual for the PM to duck questions. What I am saying though is that it means that the session did not show Cameron to be exceptional in this particular PMQ, as has been suggested by CT. Would you agree with that?

[Christmas Tree 4725]

I don't really understand your point, if you even have one.

 

 

christ man, pipe down! you're making a fool of yourself!

 

the point is Renton, you are deluded. you try and convince yourself that just because someone asked a question to which the questionee didnt know the answer is in some way a 'victory' or a 'meritous occasion' for the party of the questioner.

 

believe me it isnt a big deal or even an unusual occurance at PMQ.

 

 

Well no actually. Firstly, I was defending myself from one of your typically unfounded comments, which I see you haven't bothered responded to. Hardly see how that means I am making a fool of myself, I am deluded, or that I need to pipe down.

 

As for the second, part, you have completely missed the point. I'm not saying it is unusual for the PM to duck questions. What I am saying though is that it means that the session did not show Cameron to be exceptional in this particular PMQ, as has been suggested by CT. Would you agree with that?

 

 

Come on Renty stick to the facts I didnt say he was exceptional or a genius or the messiah.....

 

I said I thought it was a damn good performance, which I still think it was, particularly bearing in mind it was his first go and his decision to rely only a few notes.

 

The fact you dont agree with that assessment is fine, but as Craig has pointed out to you, you do seem to come from a very bias viewpoint.

 

Ive had a quick google to see what others made of it. Here are a few comments.

 

 

 

It was a very assured performance by David Cameron at PMQs. He even answered the questions put to him, which was a welcome innovation. It was interesting to see that he didn't have a sheaf of notes in front of him like Gordon Brown used to read from.

 

Facing Harriet Harman, he resembled a lion playing with a mouse. He appeared determined to kill the mouse with kindness, but in the end he resorted to instinct and crushed her beneath his foot in his final answer on the married tax allowance. Conservative MPs were delighted, and so they should have been.

 

We saw a Prime Minister in command of his office, thinking on his feet and doing his best to give an honest answer to a question - even when he didn't know the answer. I wonder how long he will be able to keep that up!

 

 

An assured first performance at PMQs by David Cameron. A good emphasis on the positive things the Government intends doing with a sprinkling of attacks on the failures of the outgoing Labour government.

 

 

Two quick observations on David Cameron's first performance at Prime Minister's Questions.

 

First, he seemed very nervous to start, and I could see his hands very visibly shaking from my vantage position directly above.

 

Second, Cameron has very few notes. Whereas Tony Blair and Gordon Brown had thick ring-binders of notes and possible replies, the new PM has only a thin sheaf of papers, and had nothing at all during his exchanges with Harriet Harman.

 

He seems to rely a lot more on memory and thinking on his feet, with some success against Harman (though I thought she performed better than normal).

 

I think that David Cameron's first PMQ's performance was really good and I am not his biggest fan

[Renton 21552]

You implied his perfomance was the start of a new era in politics:

 

Just watched Dave do his first PMQ's and must say it was a damn good performance.

 

We're talking about genuine answers to questions here not referring to ready made answers as became so commonplace under Labour.

 

Its clear as day that we now have the change and fresh start that was needed.

 

That's quite emphatic fanboy stuff, wouldn't you say?

 

I thought he was OK. I think my view is more balanced and better represented by people in the media that matter, not some randoms you have googled on the internet.

 

This is getting so boring now. If you can't see your just as biased in your assessment as I am (except the other way round, obviously), and clearly neither of us are unbiased, then there's nothing left to discuss.

[Christmas Tree 4725]

Dont know if anyone has depressed themselves on this website....

 

http://www.debtbombshell.com/

 

If not, have a quick peep.

 

Its horrific how much our country has got itself in the shit by spending money we havent got.

 

Just last year the government raised 491 billion through tax, yet decided to spend 671 billion!!! Thats nearly 200 billion that we didnt have taking our "overdraft" upto nearly 1000 billion.

 

This should put in perspective the 6 billion cuts already announced by the Conservatives as chickenfeed compared to what is still to come.

 

The interest on this debt this year is a staggering 45 billion!!!!!

 

Theres no point in playing party politics on this because I think it is a given that we all know Labour governments like to spend, spend, spend. The 80's tories also gave us their fair share of boom and bust.

 

The shocking thing for me is that Governments can get away with fucking things up like this.

 

Why hasnt the media been screaming about this for years?

 

How can MP's sell us down the swanny so easily?

 

How can they ethically or morally do this?

 

This highlights for me that most of us have no idea how deep and savage the cuts will be. We will curse and swear and the current lot but we wre happy to take the new schools, hospitals, Tax credits.......