Being a politician I am – not surprisingly – happy to stick up for politics and politicians in general.

I think politics is essential for our country – imagine what a country where government ruled without elections would be like – and I think most (though not quite all!) politicians are in it for decent reasons. I don’t think they’ve got their snouts in the trough (after all, most could easily earn more and work fewer hours outside politics) nor do I think that MPs get ridiculously long holidays (Parliament being “in recess” isn’t the same as being on holiday – conscientious MPs work through recess, researching policy, meeting constituents and so on and on). And I could go on.

But the point at which I draw the line in defending my profession is Prime Minister’s Questions. What an awful testosterone-fuelled bear pit of badly behaved boys (and it is overwhelmingly boys!) that is!

To be more precise – the flaws with PMQs fall under five headings. First, the Prime Minister only very rarely faces any detailed, forensic questioning – because the format makes it far too easy to avoid the question.

Second, too many questions get eaten up by patsy soft questions from the government’s own side. “Would the Prime Minister confirm how wonderful he is?” is only a slight paraphrase – and is a waste of everyone’s time.

Third, the atmosphere and ethos is far too much about verbal strutting and intimidation. Take for example the Labour Party’s response to Gordon Brown’s dodgy first outing at PMQs. It was to ensure that Labour MPs made lots more noise next time round, heckling and shouting down Tory MPs as they rose to ask questions. Can you imagine running a workplace on that basis? Judge a manager but how loudly his or her staff shout and heckle other managers at the weekly staff meeting? Bizarre. Yet this is meant to pass for normal adult behaviour in the Palace of Westminster.