PMQs on Progress: winners and losers

Did Cameron miss an open goal there? Commenting on PMQs were columnist Paul Richards, PPC Rachel Reeves and blogger Conor Ryan identifying who won, best backbencher

Who won?

Paul Richards: A clear win for Gordon Brown, who sounded spontaneous, rather than scripted. A series of open goals missed by David Cameron. Tory backbenches look disappointed and glum.

Rachel Reeves: Despite the chancellor providing an open goal last night for Tories to exploit today they didn't get anywhere. Brown was determined to talk policy and wasn't sent off-course. He also had control of the House, even providing his own commentary on the questions. Brown won.

Conor Ryan: Brown won because he was sharp in his answers, and Cameron missed an open goal after the allegations of the last week. He also flunked his last question: he should have said GDP per capita since 2005 but by talking about ‘this government', he allowed Brown correctly to say that GDP per capita is higher than in 1997. On Mid-Staffordshire, both leaders made sober and necessary points.

Best backbencher?

PR: Dari Taylor, MP for Stockton South, raises the steelworks at Corus - a real issue on the minds of real workers, breaking through all the Westminster fog and nonsense.

RR: Definitely Dari Taylor on Corus and the implication for her constituents. Hugely important issue and must not be drowned out by bickering on bullying and gossip.

CR: Stephen Pound getting a link to Cameron - the ‘Sherriff of Nottingham' - on darts and Guinness to his question on a Robin Hood tax; Michael Ancram on Northern Ireland for topicality.

Best joke or comment

PR: Speaker Bercow, with his plea for good order, or he will 'need some kind of helpline' himself, although David Clelland's line about a 'Scameron' was a close second. Steve Pound got some laughs for his line about enjoying darts and a pint of porter as much as any Old Etonian. Also a good line from Brown: 'I would rather defend my chancellor, than have to defend his'.

RR: Stephen Pound. "I enjoy a pint of Portes and a game of darts as much as any old Etonian... We know who stands in this House for the Sheriff of Nottingham." Well done, Stephen.

CR: Cameron's link that "even the security guards need protection at Number 10" was his wittiest; Brown's "I'd rather defend my chancellor than his" was a good rejoinder on another Cameron jibe

What does it mean for the election campaign and policy?

PR: Brown wants to stick to policy substance, and highlight the Tories' policy black hole. Cameron wants to make it a referendum on Brown's character.

RR: Implications: Tories falling in polls because people doubt substance, and Cameron re-inforced that worry today by failing to focus on the big issues. People want to know what the Tories are going to do on the economy, public services, taxes, Afghanistan. But Cameron either doesn't want to or doesn't know what he would do. Not good enough.

CR: Cameron weakly tried to link mid-Staffs to targets and processes. This was no time for Brown to defend them. But Labour needs to be sharper highlighting the implications of Tory abandonment of maximum waiting times for patients.

Conor comments: I agree with you both that Dari's was the most substantive question, and she showed real passion in asking it.

You are both right about the Tories on substance, but Labour is failing to get its message across on what the Tory policies on health, in particular, would really mean. It isn't enough for the Tories to lack substance; Labour needs to expose the implications of their less consumer-friendly policies more effectively.

Meanwhile, Gus O'Donnell's comments to the select committee about the advice he gave the PM about staff management look likely to dominate headlines tomorrow, rather than today's exchanges.

Paul's rundown: I'm sure everyone has noticed that the PM is flanked by Jack Straw - who Andrew Rawnsley claimed had plotted against Brown - and Darling who told SkyNews last night that he had been briefed against by No.10. An avert show of unity. Cameron says 'any closer, and they'll be kissing'.

Cameron led on the demands for a public inquiry into the deaths at Stafford Hospital. Brown blames management failure, but no public inquiry. I visited Stafford recently, and it struck me that the strength of public anger is so strong it could cost Labour (maj. 1852) the seat. Cameron knows it too.
His third question is down and dirty - on the PM's GMTV interview this morning. Brown's riposte - the nearest Cameron has come to talking about the economy in months - got Cameron riled. Cameron loses his temper all too easily.

Cameron returns to the 'unleashes the forces of hell' quote, but Brown gets back onto the Tories' inconsistency on economics.

Cameron has another go - with a demand for the PM to repeat that he knew nothing about briefing against Darling.

A final go from Cameron, on Britain being poorer than in 1997. Brown swats it away, and calls for a 'long hard look' at the Conservatives.

Adam Harrison

24 Feb 2010 13:01

 

Comments

• Posted by Stan Rosenthal on 24 February 2010, 6:01:33 PM Yes, Gordon is doing well but his ministers certainly aint. Darling's comments were quite disgraceful at any time but coming immediatly after the media bullying frenzy they were unforgivable. Likewise Phil Woolas's crass comment about "that pr**t of a woman". Do these guys really want us to win the election? Or do they prefer a spell in opposition? It's time to crack down on the suicide bombers in our midst.
• Posted by Harrowman on 25 February 2010, 1:57:44 PM

  Darlings' remark about "unleashing the forces of hell" coming just as the "bully Brown" controversy was dying down, was just about the most thoughtless political gaffe in recent times. How could Darling imagine when appearing on Sky News, a Murdoch media outlet, that such a remark would not be greeted by the Tories as further proof of a rift in the Labour cabinet? Did he imagine that the Tory press would just let this comment pass and discuss Labour's economic policies? The man is either naive or he has another motive, that of "getting back" at Brown. Either way its about time cabinet members and MP's showed a bit of loyalty to the party and cut out any comments likely to give ammunition to the Tories.