« | Home | »

Get rid of PMQs

Tags:

Ed Miliband has said with not very much reservation that the idea of getting rid of Prime Minister’s Questions is something he ‘might be up for’. He would look into it. As political statements go, that is edging on the emphatic. In the same interview he acknowledged public enervation at shouting matches.

He is dead right. As a sketchwriter I used to watch these encounters, and watched them deteriorate. In Gordon Brown’s time, his sullen people had a slogan, chanted ever and again: ‘No more boom or bust.’ Which, in the light of the outcome of Brown’s devotion to Ayn Rand’s favourite pupil, Alan Greenspan (granted the Freedom of the City of London in 2006), proved a cosmic custard pie too crude for irony.

I minded the chanting almost as much as the economics. ‘Come on the Rovers’ is one thing, rhythmic fiscal projection another. Where’s the dignity? where the wisdom of staying shut-up? I did less than my share of PMQs and tried, if the business of the day could pass in a flickering light as interesting, to stay for that and write the sketch – very quickly, but actually about something.

The general view of the lodge, though, was that this was being done especially for us, knock-about put on for knockers-about. Unfortunately that includes the ones in the chamber. From the leadership’s point of view, it was a pool of dubious light in which to be seen and perform. Thatcher could be iron-sided, Callaghan spurious-paternal, Macmillan a shrewd, not illiberal old gent who knew a thing or two and carried nice crumbs for discerning pigeons. Macmillan was good at it. Major, creditably, wasn’t. And Cameron is awful.

Overall, PMQs diminish the reputation of Parliament. The general contempt for MPs, which so many of them don’t deserve, owes a great deal to the sheer childishness of such overtures to an unattended opera. If you want a fairer and friendlier public, keep the cameras in committee, especially Public Accounts. Get polite. Get detailed. And remember: people are not as interested in party politics as you are.

Comment on this post

Log in or register to post a comment.


  • Recent Posts

    RSS – posts

  • Contributors

  • Recent Comments

    • andymartinink on Reacher v. Parker: Slayground definitely next on my agenda. But to be fair to Lee Child, as per the Forbes analysis, there is clearly a massive collective reader-writer ...
    • Robert Hanks on Reacher v. Parker: And in Breakout, Parker, in prison, teams up with a black guy to escape; another white con dislikes it but accepts the necessity; Parker is absolutely...
    • Robert Hanks on Reacher v. Parker: Parker may not have the integrity and honesty of Marlowe, but I'd argue that Richard Stark writes with far more of both than Raymond Chandler does: Ch...
    • Christopher Tayler on Reacher v. Parker: Good to see someone holding up standards. The explanation is that I had thoughts - or words - left over from writing about Lee Child. (For Chandler se...
    • Geoff Roberts on Reacher v. Parker: ..."praised in the London Review of Books" Just read the article on Lee Child in a certain literary review and was surprised to find this rave notice...

    RSS – comments

  • Contact

  • Blog Archive

  • From the LRB Archive

    Chris Lehmann: The Candidates
    18 June 2015

    ‘Every one of the Republican candidates can be described as a full-blown adult failure. These are people who, in most cases, have been granted virtually every imaginable advantage on the road to success, and managed nevertheless to foul things up along the way.’

    Hugh Pennington:
    The Problem with Biodiversity
    10 May 2007

    ‘As a medical microbiologist, for example, I have spent my career fighting biodiversity: my ultimate aim has been to cause the extinction of harmful microbes, an objective shared by veterinary and plant pathologists. But despite more than a hundred years of concentrated effort, supported by solid science, smallpox has been the only success.’

    Jeremy Harding: At the Mexican Border
    20 October 2011

    ‘The battle against illegal migration is a domestic version of America’s interventions overseas, with many of the same trappings: big manpower commitments, militarisation, pursuit, detection, rendition, loss of life. The Mexican border was already the focus of attention before 9/11; it is now a fixation that shows no signs of abating.’

    James Meek: When the Floods Came
    31 July 2008

    ‘Last July, a few days after the floods arrived, with 350,000 people still cut off from the first necessity of life, Severn Trent held its annual general meeting. It announced profits of £325 million, and confirmed a dividend for shareholders of £143 million. Not long afterwards the company, with the consent of the water regulator Ofwat, announced that it wouldn’t be compensating customers: all would be charged as if they had had running water, even when they hadn’t.’

Advertisement Advertisement