Nick Clegg at last seems to be finding his feet at Deputy Prime Minister’s Question Time. He is treating facetious Labour questions with the dismissive brevity they deserve. He is taking them head on. For example, when Labour’s John Spellar asked a particularly smart-arsed question, Nick Clegg replied with “I cannot be bothered to answer that question.” It seemed a very appropriate response.
I thought Clegg dealt with Harriet Harman’s questions very well. She asked about the Educational Maintenance Allowance and University funding. On the latter point, Clegg replied that there are still two or three months to go before the Office for Fair Access provides consent for any £9,000 fees, so it is too early to forecast what will happen. He also said that “if we include bursaries and fee waivers, the average level of charges imposed on individual students will be a whole lot lower.”
Other snippets were:
- After some extended Clegg-baiting on the “British Bill of Rights”, Nick Clegg stated very clearly:“I am a passionate advocate, supporter and defender of the Human Rights Act—full stop.” The “Long Grass” Commission (my name), he said, is “looking at the case for a British Bill of Rights”.
- Woohoo! Proposals for reform of the House of Lords will be published “by the end of next month”
Once House of Lords reform proposals have been announced, the government will establish a “West Lothian commission”. - The AV referendum will cost “roughly the same as every general election.” Nick Clegg also said: “This Government have set aside £120 million for the costs of the next general election.” So it would not require a complete leap of faith to say that the referendum will cost £120 million – ish.
Follow @libdemvoice.org on Bluesky
Like us on Facebook
Subscribe to our feed
Sign-up for our daily email digest
Another myth that should die: The Victorians covered table legs because they thought were indecent
Graphics and AV tools for solo consultants
Weekly Road Report - West End Ward #dundeewestend
Barry Smith
Steve Trevethan
Tim Rogers
Simon R
Sue Doughty
14 Comments
Unfortunately the BBC news only showed Harman’s bit in the commons (about April Fool) and failed to join up Nick’s campaign for social mobility with measures already announced such as the pupil premium. I don’t quite know why they wouldn’t want to give viewers a reasonably undistorted and balanced view but I think they succeeded.
Well, this was the best DPMQs I’ve ever seen. We’ve got the old Nick back – tackling questions head on! He was certainly on top form! Looking forward to more of this! 🙂
I must disagree as I thought he lost this one.
Whoever is advising him needs a new job. This week he has managed to get so attached to the NHS reforms that anything less than a full acceptance of the conference proposals will damage him internally. He then makes a big issue regarding the nepotism around internships when he obtained an internship through “family connections”.
It’s clear most Universities are going to be charging at or near the maximum, South Bank, the lowest performing University, is looking to charge £8000.
More and more he is firming up the image of hypocrite, even when it cis unfair and could be avoided…
@Steve – so you don’t like Clegg or the Lib Dems. Why don’t you just say it?
Hi Paul.
I must say, I agree with Steve. Clegg got hammered in my view. His “I can’t be bothered to answer” response just looked childish. The Commons appears to see DPMQ’s as a complete joke, with most lining up to mock him. His reputation is being further damaged by these unnecessary spectacles. Outside of the Political nerd-o-sphere (my particular home) – no-one gives a fig for them.
I agree that his advisors (is it still Norman?) need to be ejected immediately. Seeing him on BBC Breakfast trying to defend the NHS car-crash was humiliating, then hearing get torn apart by Nicky Campbell on 5Live just rounded it off.
He can’t take much more of this in my view. He’s visibly aged 10 years in less than a year.
Journalism is one of those professions where who you knows matters enormously. It should be no surprise that they make a cheap attack on the strategy the story, and ignore the strategy itself.
@John Minard
Haven’t you realised the BBC are biased towards Labour by now? It’s about one of the few taxpayer funded institutions that’s allowed to be so partisan.
@Steve Way
He’s the leader of the Lib Dems. I (along with thousands of other conference reps) voted on NHS policy at the last conference. He’s also Deputy Prime Minister in the Coalition Government. Therefore it’s his job to defend both his party’s and the coalitions policies on the NHS (which may not always be the same).
As to nepotism you’ll find it rife in politics but more so in tribal parties such as Labour. When Gwyneth Dunwoody died and triggered a byelection, who did Labour chose as candidate, yes her daughter. The Lib Dems are a little more internally democratic as a party regarding selections and elections, but ultimately getting elected to a party post or by the public relies on connections.
@Joe Otten
As an NUJ member I disagree, there are many areas of journalism where it doesn’t matter. If we take PMQs as an example, since the public gallery got screened off (after the purple flour bombs) there’s about 1/4 of the space left for the public with (if I remember correctly) a strict limit of a small number of people at any one time. The other 3/4 of space is hardly ever in use. There are tickets for this area awarded to MPs and VIPs (eg embassy staff etc).
Any journalist reporting on PMQs just watches it on TV like everyone else (even if you’re in the public gallery you have to watch it on the screens as it can no longer be heard directly from down below due to the screen).
Each political party has its press officers which send out press releases with ready made quotes. Journalism can be done in a very lazy way these days. However if a journalist is a member of a union, there are union rules they are supposed to follow and people can complain to the PCC (or about the BBC if it’s favouring one political party too much).
Strangely I seem to remember there are/were legal requirements on the BBC during an election period regarding equal coverage. Does anyone know if this is just for General Elections or it covers the referendum/local election period too?
Nick Clegg, once again barely answered a question IMO. He keeps going on about the fact that “There is no money left” when he is asked why he has scrapped fees/EMA etc. This is the worst excuse ever for justifying his decisions. After all, he has millions on his pupil premium, he has found £100m for an AV referendum, he has found money for a loan to Ireland. Where has he found such money if as he states “There is no money left”. Clegg is making political decisions over where to spend the fewer funds that are available and he needs to justify why he beleives we should be spending it on overseas aid, AV referendum, EU budget increases etc rather than EMA/higher education. As someone who voted Lib Dem last May in a Lab-Lib Dem marginal I am appalled by his choices, and he has not yet justified them except for his argument of “There is no money left.” I for one will never vote Lib Dem until Clegg is removed as leader.
@John Brace
The rules of the Representation of the People Act apply to local government elections and referendums also, according to the Ofcom rules for non BBC broadcasters:
http://stakeholders.ofcom.org.uk/broadcasting/broadcast-codes/broadcast-code/elections/
The BBC guidelines are here and also cover local government elections:
http://downloads.bbc.co.uk/guidelines/editorialguidelines/pdfs/election_guidelines_2011.pdf
@John
I voted for them, I liked Clegg but feel he has let me down since the start iof the coalition (the establishment of which I supported).
I’ve never hid this in months of comments on this site.
I like the Lib dems, and may well vote for them again. If those within the party who made their voices heard at the spring conference regain some element of control over the parliamentary party…
I note you didn’t bother to address my points regarding him being poorely advised. You might also note that I stated he is made to look like a hypocrite even when it is unfair….
@John Brace
Yes he is the Deputy PM, but consider this. By tying him so closely to the reforms it takes away his potential to show to his own party his own acceptance of their position. Too many times the Tories cleverly position a Lib Dem into the firing line, I think this is another example.
As to nepotism. You miss my point. Whoever advises him should have seen this poor press in advance and changed his speech accordingly. He is managing to get hammered for things he really shouldn’t. I don’t think he did anything wrong, and actually don’t care who Labour chose to be a candidate. He needs to get people around him who stop him being a whipping boy and give him room to show the Lib Dems are a distinct force.
If he could have avoided this he would have won the day hands down..
On Gwynneth Dunwoody – of course, she wasn’t the first generation in the Labour establishment – her father, Morgan Phillips, was General Secretary of the Labour Party for 8 years!
Moreover, where are the Whips in all of this? Aren’t they supposed to be the NCO’s who organise “extraordinary parliamentary manoeuvres” which the officers can deny any knowledge of? Shouldn’t they be organising support for Nick Clegg nad roughing up the goon squad? Action from the sidelines would take all the fun out of all the Clegg baiting, as the cameras would no longer be giving the smartarses the attention they obiously crave. Even if they didn’t like their officers, I never heard of NCO’s who would sit by and allow them to be roughed up, that would simply be letting the side down.
He did really well and I was impressed with his performance. Are people saying the coverage on iplayer/bbc parliament is biased?
Loved the speaker’s comment “The Deputy Prime minister can look after himself,” as he called order again.
From my perspective I see Nick as trying to raise the bar – politics and journalism in this country is distinctly immature. I appreciate the debate on this site, even opposing POV, in fact especially opposing POV, as I enjoy debate. The shrill, vicious, immature comment by large quantities of both the Labour party and the left and right wing press, does nothing to edify us as a country. I hope Nick’s measured approach will win out in the end.