Topic: The Labour Party (*)

[TravisBickle]

I seriously challenge that nonsensical view SP. I've seen countless PMQ's and it's a ritualistic dirge we hear from Bercow. His input goes from "The Prime Minister" (delivered in tones of sham reverence of course- as is traditionally required) to "Jeremy Corbyn" as soon as she has sat down after delivering yet more of her bollux-spouting drivel.
Never once has he said (nor anyone come to that) "Would the Right honourable member please desist from rolling out her well-prepared and rehearsed standard response - however droll or amusing she believes it to be -and answer the question put"?

Why this archaic terminology shite is ever spoken is beyond me. Whilst she's definitely on the "right", there's nothing at all "honourable" about the parlour game she gleefully plays to the audience whilst assaulting our most vulnerable citizens through her punitive and vindictive policies.

There's not a thing to admire about playing charades with our people's lives.  It's a disgraceful sham of a show that's put on for the telly. No place for it in any serious democracy - which ours isn't even close to being. I am astonished that some very experienced observers in this thread appear to relish such shite show-boating treatment. Maybe I must have been born deficient in the "masochistic gene" allocation.

 Would you have a problem with PMQs if Corbyn trounced May on a weekly basis and used it to build a poll lead over her?

[armchair-fan]

He's the Garth Cooks of PMQs...

He said he wanted 'A staircase for all' at one stage.  Interesting pledge.  And this on a day the government had to unravel the centre point of their budget a week after it was announced.

Anyway, I'm pretty sure it was Blair's fault that he didn't ask the right questions, well Blair and the Murdoch press..

[SP]

I seriously challenge that nonsensical view SP. I've seen countless PMQ's and it's a ritualistic dirge we hear from Bercow. His input goes from "The Prime Minister" (delivered in tones of sham reverence of course- as is traditionally required) to "Jeremy Corbyn" as soon as she has sat down after delivering yet more of her bollux-spouting drivel.
Never once has he said (nor anyone come to that) "Would the Right honourable member please desist from rolling out her well-prepared and rehearsed standard response - however droll or amusing she believes it to be -and answer the question put"?

Why this archaic terminology shite is ever spoken is beyond me. Whilst she's definitely on the "right", there's nothing at all "honourable" about the parlour game she gleefully plays to the audience whilst assaulting our most vulnerable citizens through her punitive and vindictive policies.

There's not a thing to admire about playing charades with our people's lives.  It's a disgraceful sham of a show that's put on for the telly. No place for it in any serious democracy - which ours isn't even close to being. I am astonished that some very experienced observers in this thread appear to relish such shite show-boating treatment. Maybe I must have been born deficient in the "masochistic gene" allocation.

It is the Speaker's job to ensure that the parliamentary rules are followed. Not answering the question does not fall under those rules. The leader of the opposition is perfectly free to highlight the lack of answers and make conclusions from that. Evading the question should make the PM look very bad. Failing to make her pay the price of evasion is a failing of the opposition.

If you want to extend the Speaker's job to referee content, the job becomes virtually impossible to do. Any interventions would by their nature be political and contentious. Such a system would rapidly become untenable.

Would you rather have Trump's approach to being questioned? PMQ forces the PM to answer to the house every week. For all of its faults, there is a decree of accountability most nations do not have. Even evading questions forces the PM onto the record dodging the question. A skillful politician will make something from that.

[killer-heels]

I seriously challenge that nonsensical view SP. I've seen countless PMQ's and it's a ritualistic dirge we hear from Bercow. His input goes from "The Prime Minister" (delivered in tones of sham reverence of course- as is traditionally required) to "Jeremy Corbyn" as soon as she has sat down after delivering yet more of her bollux-spouting drivel.
Never once has he said (nor anyone come to that) "Would the Right honourable member please desist from rolling out her well-prepared and rehearsed standard response - however droll or amusing she believes it to be -and answer the question put"?

Why this archaic terminology shite is ever spoken is beyond me. Whilst she's definitely on the "right", there's nothing at all "honourable" about the parlour game she gleefully plays to the audience whilst assaulting our most vulnerable citizens through her punitive and vindictive policies.

There's not a thing to admire about playing charades with our people's lives.  It's a disgraceful sham of a show that's put on for the telly. No place for it in any serious democracy - which ours isn't even close to being. I am astonished that some very experienced observers in this thread appear to relish such shite show-boating treatment. Maybe I must have been born deficient in the "masochistic gene" allocation.

Surely you dont believe that?

[JohnnoWhite]

Surely you dont believe that?

You'll need to define "that" so I understand what you are attempting - and failing - to say. What bit of this synopsis "I am sick to death watching this insulting charade masquerading as grown-up politics" don't YOU understand?

[killer-heels]

You'll need to define "that" so I understand what you are attempting - and failing - to say. What bit of this synopsis "I am sick to death watching this insulting charade masquerading as grown-up politics" don't YOU understand?

The role of the speaker?

[JohnnoWhite]

It is the Speaker's job to ensure that the parliamentary rules are followed. Not answering the question does not fall under those rules. The leader of the opposition is perfectly free to highlight the lack of answers and make conclusions from that. Evading the question should make the PM look very bad. Failing to make her pay the price of evasion is a failing of the opposition.

If you want to extend the Speaker's job to referee content, the job becomes virtually impossible to do. Any interventions would by their nature be political and contentious. Such a system would rapidly become untenable.

Would you rather have Trump's approach to being questioned? PMQ forces the PM to answer to the house every week. For all of its faults, there is a decree of accountability most nations do not have. Even evading questions forces the PM onto the record dodging the question. A skillful politician will make something from that.

I am also sick of hearing it's "a degree of accountability some nations do not have". What it really is - is a prolongation of a long tired traditional piece of 18th century pageantry. It's an ineffectual and inefficiently disciplined, pompous and theatrical diatribe which we are forced still to endure. It is an insulting side-show and a blatant elitist snub to the REAL and desperate needs of our citizens. In short, it's a load of bollux.

[zero zero]

I am also sick of hearing it's "a degree of accountability some nations do not have". What it really is - is a prolongation of a long tired traditional piece of 18th century pageantry. It's an ineffectual and inefficiently disciplined, pompous and theatrical diatribe which we are forced still to endure. It is an insulting side-show and a blatant elitist snub to the REAL and desperate needs of our citizens. In short, it's a load of bollux.

I'm sure it's entirely coincidental that Corbyn is utterly abject at it!

[Zeb]

It's as effective as the person asking or replying to the questions. Wilson and Blair did it well. Brown not so much. Corbyn barely at all.

[SP]

I am also sick of hearing it's "a degree of accountability some nations do not have". What it really is - is a prolongation of a long tired traditional piece of 18th century pageantry. It's an ineffectual and inefficiently disciplined, pompous and theatrical diatribe which we are forced still to endure. It is an insulting side-show and a blatant elitist snub to the REAL and desperate needs of our citizens. In short, it's a load of bollux.

PMQs is merely a medium. Both Miliband and Corbyn have been particularly poor at it. Look back to Kinnock and Blair in Opposition to see more how it should have been done. PMQ is an opportunity to prick that pomposity, but it requires political and rhetorical skill. May is decided average at the dispatch box and it is immensely frustrating seeing being let off time and again.

If PMQs was abolished, it would be replaced with something far less fraught for the PM. We should not be making things easier for May. 

[Sangria]

I am also sick of hearing it's "a degree of accountability some nations do not have". What it really is - is a prolongation of a long tired traditional piece of 18th century pageantry. It's an ineffectual and inefficiently disciplined, pompous and theatrical diatribe which we are forced still to endure. It is an insulting side-show and a blatant elitist snub to the REAL and desperate needs of our citizens. In short, it's a load of bollux.

Contrast with Jeremy Corbyn and Owen Smith saying essentially the same thing to a single audience, with Corbyn being cheered to the rafters and Smith being booed soundly. Now that's proper politics.

[killer-heels]

McDonnell was embarrassing just now on five live. Attacked the BBC for its bias when questioned about Labour MP's criticising Corbyn through tweets.

[Wabaloolah]

Good god - a new low for Corbyn there.

A humiliating government u-turn, cluelessness about what to do with Brexit, the country potentially breaking up and that's all he can come up with? He didn't even ask a question 2 or 3 times.

bloody hell, any opposition leader worth their salt would have been ripping into her for the NI fiasco. Compare this buffoon with the way Tony Blair and even Cameron used to operate at the Despatch Box both in Opposition and then as PM. He really is the gift that keeps on giving.  The Tories really cannot believe their luck with this berk

[Wabaloolah]

McDonnell was embarrassing just now on five live. Attacked the BBC for its bias when questioned about Labour MP's criticising Corbyn through tweets.

McDonnell is worse than Corbyn, I believe it was he who wouldn't let Corbyn stand down from the leadership election mark 2 as Corbyn resigning would have meant the left would have lost control as no way would the MPs have put another idiot onto the ballot.

I have more disdain for this bloke than I do from Corbyn.  McDonnell is a nasty incompetent bastard, Corbyn is just incompetent

[TepidT2O]

Johnno is probably right that PMQs is practically useless... but it has been for decades..
The reason it still goes on, is that you get to see the PM and the leader of the opposition head to head.
It's the one time it happens, pretty much the only time.

As such it's highly newsworthy.  How do they compare? Who speaks better?  The public gets a very stark snapshot of them in that moment (even if it's quite an artificial environment).

And that's why it matters if your leader is utterly rubbish at it.

[killer-heels]

Johnno is probably right that PMQs is practically useless... but it has been for decades..
The reason it still goes on, is that you get to see the PM and the leader of the opposition head to head.
It's the one time it happens, pretty much the only time.

As such it's highly newsworthy.  How do they compare? Who speaks better?  The public gets a very stark snapshot of them in that moment (even if it's quite an artificial environment).

And that's why it matters if your leader is utterly rubbish at it.

If anything PMQ's is an audition to your own party and a way of keeping your own party in check. Politics is always about pushing agenda's and if you perform well you basically keep your own coalition together.

[Sangria]

If anything PMQ's is an audition to your own party and a way of keeping your own party in check. Politics is always about pushing agenda's and if you perform well you basically keep your own coalition together.

PMQs demonstrated the incompetence of the Tory government under Major and the competence of the Labour opposition under Blair. Cue a landslide Labour victory in 1997.

[Red-Soldier]

PMQs demonstrated the incompetence of the Tory government under Major and the competence of the Labour opposition under Blair. Cue a landslide Labour victory in 1997.

I remember Major being constantly hammered by Blair, he just wasn't able to deal with it.

May isn't a very good speaker or particularly charismatic, but, Corbyn is just horrendous.

He's the ultimate free lunch for the Tories.

[JohnnoWhite]

The role of the speaker?

This silly outdated role allows all sorts of nonsense - booing , jeering like a 5th form debate like there was nothing vitally important at stake. If Westminster debates  and PMQ's are to mean anything then that 6Speaker's role must insist that all this crap  stop and issues are discussed like adults with integrity and decency. Otherwise, it's a sham.

[killer-heels]

This silly outdated role allows all sorts of nonsense - booing , jeering like a 5th form debate like there was nothing vitally important at stake. If Westminster debates  and PMQ's are to mean anything then that 6Speaker's role must insist that all this crap  stop and issues are discussed like adults with integrity and decency. Otherwise, it's a sham.

Of course its silly. Its pompous and ridiculous and as old fashioned as you will find. But the reality is that its basically the game. If you dont shine in our system then you are, quite frankly, fucked. The opposition leader has several questions and its designed to press home and pressure the government to answer the question.

Take the missile fiasco in the winter. May was unconvincing in PMQ's and it led to Tories briefing about how poor she is when not briefed. Thats the doubt that PMQ's can put in their own party and of their own leader. If Labour are to have any chance then Corbyn needs to press the government, make it clear she is lying and fashion some doubt.

If people dont accept the system then they are just living in La La Land.

[TepidT2O]

Well I've just seen the highlights of PMQs



Holy fuck...  May... fucking atrocious...

Corbyn?  In a different league...

[Trev20]

Today I watched previous encounters between Blair and Cameron - real heavyweight clashes.

These days it's just a waste of time since both are so very incompetent orators.

Angus Robertson was far more effective at holding Mrs May to account with his question as opposed to the official opposition.

[TravisBickle]

Today I watched previous encounters between Blair and Cameron - real heavyweight clashes.

These days it's just a waste of time since both are so very incompetent orators.

Angus Robertson was far more effective at holding Mrs May to account with his question as opposed to the official opposition.

 It's fascinating to watch how Cameron handles it. He knows he can't try the bully boy approach he adopted with Brown and continued with Miliband because Blair was the master of it. Cameron knew he had tread very lightly.

[Trev20]

It's fascinating to watch how Cameron handles it. He knows he can't try the bully boy approach he adopted with Brown and continued with Miliband because Blair was the master of it. Cameron knew he had tread very lightly.

Exchanges between Blair and Cameron were facinating mate.

Today was just a shitshow. Embarrassing really.

[Trada]

[TheShanklyGates]

Yep, all Corbyn that.

[killer-heels]

A few reports have described today's PMQ's as one of the worst, ever. I cant say i have watched all of those but watching todays one was certainly pretty bad.

Also at 6:50, one of the most embarrassing things to behold in PMQ's (sorry Trada).

https://youtu.be/t5y6e11EqFY

[oldfordie]

A few reports have described today's PMQ's as one of the worst, ever. I cant say i have watched all of those but watching todays one was certainly pretty bad.

Also at 6:50, one of the most embarrassing things to behold in PMQ's (sorry Trada).

https://youtu.be/t5y6e11EqFY

It was, May told him,"the honourable gentleman hasn't quiet got the hang of this,he's supposed to ask questions."
May really does leave herself wide open sometimes and this should have been pounced on by Corbyn, how hes asked question after question and your not answering any of them, shall we start again as you haven't quiet got the hang of this, I ask a question and you answer that question fully and I will remind you of this fact every time you dont answer my question.
Corbyn could now throw that same insult at her every time she trys to dodge out of answering any of his questions.

[Trada]

<a href="https://www.youtube.com/v/bqCi-hfGOl4" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer" class="bbc_link bbc_flash_disabled new_win">https://www.youtube.com/v/bqCi-hfGOl4</a>

[zero zero]

<a href="https://www.youtube.com/v/bqCi-hfGOl4" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer" class="bbc_link bbc_flash_disabled new_win">https://www.youtube.com/v/bqCi-hfGOl4</a>

He says that Jeremy Corbyn "the man that played a pivotal role in getting the Conservatives to back down on the policy..."

1) What did Jeremy actually do?

2) Could Jeremy have not remembered his "pivotal role" during PMQs?

(He also uses the term "fake news" about the tax return story. Ha ha. Well done Corbynites)

[SP]

The Mainstream media buried the story of a U-turn by giving the story more prominence than the PMQ one? Corbyn was an irrelevance to the U-turn. The despised mainstream media hammered the manifesto breakage story and the Tory Party internally rebelled against it. The u turn would have panned out the same if Corbyn had said nothing at all. It is all a bit embarrassing trying to take credit for it.

[Sangria]

The Mainstream media buried the story of a U-turn by giving the story more prominence than the PMQ one? Corbyn was an irrelevance to the U-turn. The despised mainstream media hammered the manifesto breakage story and the Tory Party internally rebelled against it. The u turn would have panned out the same if Corbyn had said nothing at all. It is all a bit embarrassing trying to take credit for it.

And this after the Copeland defeat, where everyone and everything was blamed but Corbyn. And Johnowhite blaming the speaker for not making May answer questions.

Corbyn in the eys of his fans: takes all the credit, but none of the responsibility.

[hide5seek]

I'm sure it's entirely coincidental that Corbyn is utterly abject at it!

and to be fair he's not even that good at it.

[Red-Soldier]

Can't remember who it was, but a Tory was getting hammered by the interviewer this morning, regarding the NI u-turn.  At least some people are doing their jobs.

Corbyn is just a sorry excuse for a politician.

[JohnnoWhite]

Would you have a problem with PMQs if Corbyn trounced May on a weekly basis and used it to build a poll lead over her?

You aren't getting it are you? I detest it for the bag of top-show shite that it is. Why? Because it's STILL a side-show charade and needs reforming/updating/proceduralising or most preferable of all ,scrapping.
 
It's an ongoing festering scabby affront to the intelligence of our people. A great sneering smirking pantomime broadcast live weekly and allegedly "critically informative" when in truth it gives licence to our ruling lords of Westminster to stick two massive fingers up - and live for all of us to see!
It's an absolute total bollux and until its "merits" are challenged formally and exposed for the bullshit, bluff and counter-bluff (or to give it its shortened title the BBC ) that it really is, those grinning, drooling, guffawing, twatty toffs will gleefully continue to shaft us all blue-eyed, sneering and smirking.

[JohnnoWhite]

Can't remember who it was, but a Tory was getting hammered by the interviewer this morning, regarding the NI u-turn.  At least some people are doing their jobs.

Corbyn is just a sorry excuse for a politician.

Dearie dearie me - and the show goes on.....and on...... and the smoke and mirrors brigade are in the ascendancy.

How long does it need to be before all the Tory smoke disperses and those shiny top-show mirrors shatter and lay bare the greatest dupe we as a people have ever been subjected to?

[classycarra]

Criticise the BBC all you like Johnno, but they do more to hold the government to account than Corbyn and his team does.

Personally I appreciate the BBC more than ever, in the absence of a leader of the opposition

[Libertine]

These really are two different parties - how long can they continue this sham marriage?




https://twitter.com/theobertram/status/842000071570948097

[Sangria]

Criticise the BBC all you like Johnno, but they do more to hold the government to account than Corbyn and his team does.

Personally I appreciate the BBC more than ever, in the absence of a leader of the opposition

It's incredible how every instance of how incompetent Corbyn leads his fans to disclaim this thing or that as irrelevant. It's an ever-retreating definition of democracy that has as its bedrock the belief that Corbyn is the greatest thing since sliced bread. Anything that makes Corbyn look good, even by taking the credit for work done by others, is all to the good. Anything that makes him look bad is an affront to democracy. This mentality and OMOV is why the Labour party is dead.

[SP]

These really are two different parties - how long can they continue this sham marriage?




https://twitter.com/theobertram/status/842000071570948097

Curiously for an image of "data" posted on Twitter, it appears to be complete bollocks.  Looking at the data is quite interesting, but it bears little relation to that graphic. 

http://election-data.co.uk/labour-membership-poll-results-2017