Prime Minister's Questions
Discussion
Gaz. said:
I'm amazed the Labour party voted for this chap to lead them and speak on their behalf. He does not have a single string to his bow, he cannot think on his feet, he has no wit, no charm, no vision outside of politics, he is awful to watch and listen to and looks like a sixth former. Could you imagine this chap around a hostile table with Putin for example?
He was voted in as cannon fodder, no more, no less. The senior members of the labour party, no doubt, simply wanted somebody who they could dump without impact, once the election and winky were forgotten and Cameron and Co have done all the hard and dirty work getting the country back into something a little more viable than we have at the moment.
davislove said:
one thing I'm curious about, does the PM get prior knowledge of all the questions likely to tabled for the session?
For some of them in theory, but they usually ask about his diary or engagements and then use their supplementary question to ask about anything they want. When you watch, you will notice that the first answer is always about meetings or similar, and so the remaining questioners don't bother to ask it and just carry on with something else.Gaz. said:
I was including the unions in the question, I just do not see what was in it for them. As Andrew points out for the MPs he's cannon fodder & scapegoat, but imo this arrangement wouldn't suit the unions who would need a strong leader to further their agendas.
The clown who the unions would like to follow minigland, will no doubt be a desk thumping union lunatic like winky . . . my guess is that out of the current lot, they'd ultimately want somebody like ballstank slapper said:
I think it was Blair who changed it to the single 30 minute format, instead of the twice weekly 15 minute format previously. He also seemed to field a huge number of 'Does the Prime Minister agree that the sun shines out of his backside?' type questions. Perhaps it was because of the large number of Labour MPs after 1997, but it seemed to turn into a promotional opportunity rather than any attempt at parliamentary scrutiny.
Agreed. PMQ these days seems to be little more than an opportunity for the boy Aliceband to demonstrate his ineptitude. Very sad and not good for the country, ultimately. We need strong government and a good opposition. Not sure we have either at present but probably more the former than the latter.
Halb said:
Fittster said:
What's the point of parliament as a whole? A small elite around Cameron decide policy, the average back bencher is nothing more than a jumped up social worker.
But what would you replace it with?
k up, let the blame lie with everyone.Direct Democracy
Fittster said:
I do like the Swiss model...but would require a revolution here, like the one we almost had in the 20s...and definitely did have thanks to Cromwell
Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff