PMQs: Broadcast the Prime Ministerial Test Card

He’s been one of the safest pairs of ministerial hands over decades. But he dropped a serious brick during a Five Live interview this morning. Then he wouldn’t answer his phone even when it was Number Ten trying to urgently contact him. Then the Leader of the Opposition called for his sacking at Prime Minister’s Questions. Then Number 10 went ballistic and sent him out to do another round of media interviews to try to mitigate the damage. It was quite a day in the life of one Rt. Hon Kenneth Harry “Ken” Clarke QC MP.

When the Prime Minister has to use the excuse “I haven’t heard the interview” and repeat a standard spiel on government policy, then you know things are serious. It’s the Prime Ministerial equivalent of the old TV Test Card. After Clarke’s non-answering of his phone, David Cameron had to walk naked into the Commons chamber (to paraphrase Aneurin Bevan). What a mess.

You can read the full Clarke interview here. It’s quite painful. Full marks to Victoria Derbyshire on Five Live for getting Ken Clarke on the ropes. You can see what he was trying to say. He just got himself into an awful pickle trying to say it. …And on the same day that the Home Secretary got a roasting from the police. Oh dear.

It is interesting that Ed Miliband seems to have nicked part of his script from Victoria Derbyshire: (The policy) “could mean that rapists spend as little as 15 months in prison.”

Cameron finally found what he thought was a way out by saying Miliband would have to wait for the consultation on sentencing. But there is a pattern emerging here, as Miliband highlighted: “We are getting used to this. As we saw on health, when there is a terrible policy the Prime Minister just hides behind the consultation.”

The Miliband had a bit of a field day: “The judges are saying the policy is wrong, End Violence Against Women is saying that it is the wrong policy, and his own Victims Commissioner says that the policy is “bonkers”.”

Cameron tried hard. But it is difficult not to conclude that Miliband had his best PMQs today, greatly aided by one Ken Clarke.

Other snippets were:

  • Sir Alan Beith (LibDem) asked whether people will be given bank shares when they are denationalized, as suggested by Stephen Williams (LibDem) and supported by The Sun.
  • Cameron has never met Mark Britnell, an alleged Prime Ministerial adviser on health. Indeed, Mark Britnell has never advised this government. He advised the Labour government. Cameron must have been a bit upset that that zinger was knocked down into the bowels of PMQs by Clarke.
Read more by or more about , , or .
This entry was posted in PMQs.
Advert

5 Comments

  • I disagree. What Kenneth Clark was saying was correct. Crown Court judges have to assess the degree of seriousness in rape offences every day of the week. The sentencing guidelines clearly mark rape offences of varying degrees of seriousness, and the appropriate sentences. There is not one simple class of rape marked by one simple sentence. I would have expected Miliband and his alleged home affairs spokesperson to know this. The media finally managed to get its head round this by the end of the day.

  • @Moggy, trouble is Clarge stated there was ‘serious rape’ and therefore ‘not serious rape’, not degrees of severity. He sought equivalence between underage sex and date rape, the former is not rape unless one party is under 13. At the very least the Justice Secretary is not familiar with the law on which he is expressing an opinion. His continued refusual, untill ordered to by the PM, to apologise, suggests someone not particulalry keen on a sensitive approach to sensitive subjects.

  • “Clarge stated there was ‘serious rape’ and therefore ‘not serious rape’. ”

    This is playing with words. The fact that the sentencing guidelines indicate there are “more serious” types of rape logically means that there are “less serious” types of rape. Not my opinion but the way the law actually works. We might say all rape offences are serious firstly because of the nature of the offence and then because they are in the Crown Court at all. So Clark’s mistake is actually that he didn’t say “serious” and “very serious”, and not that he was wrong in principle.

    Clark was was right to indicate there were varying degrees of heinousness and Miliband was wrong to say all rape offences were the same and cannot be distinguished, and even more wrong to co-opt rape victims to make a cheap political point. The actual real criminal justice system has the invidious job of differentiating between the seriousness of criminal offences taking all the circumstances of the crime into account. Judges do this. Solicitors and counsel do this. Probation officers do this. To suggest it is otherwise is a disservice to victims of the more heinous crimes.

    Let’s have a debate informed by the reality of the criminal justice system and not a posse comitatus to chase down someone accused of a gaffe.

  • Gareth Jones 21st May '11 - 4:06pm

    I read this idea on another website and I reproduce it hear for the sake of debate. What if there was a single crime of “rape” with a single range of punishment? If the victim is beaten a charge of GBH, etc., is added to the charge sheet and if found guilty punishment is added to the sentence?

  • ““Clarge stated there was ‘serious rape’ and therefore ‘not serious rape’. ”

    This is playing with words. The fact that the sentencing guidelines indicate there are “more serious” types of rape logically means that there are “less serious” types of rape.”

    He also used the terms ‘proper rape’ and ‘classic rape’. He really did make a complete mess of the interview . To be fair it did come about due to interviewer incorrectly stating the average sentence for rape was 5 years, (last year it was 8), which clearly Clark knew was wrong but jumped to the wrong reasons.

Post a Comment

Lib Dem Voice welcomes comments from everyone but we ask you to be polite, to be on topic and to be who you say you are. You can read our comments policy in full here. Please respect it and all readers of the site.

If you are a member of the party, you can have the Lib Dem Logo appear next to your comments to show this. You must be registered for our forum and can then login on this public site with the same username and password.

To have your photo next to your comment please signup your email address with Gravatar.

Your email is never published. Required fields are marked *

*
*
Please complete the name of this site, Liberal Democrat ...?

Advert



Recent Comments

  • User AvatarAlex Macfie 5th Dec - 5:53pm
    Andrew T: Actually we have a tight targeting strategy. as reflected in constituency polls indicating large surges in seats we are targeting (e.g. F&GG, Esher...
  • User AvatarJames Brough 5th Dec - 4:25pm
    My thanks to Ollie for an interesting and thoughtful article. Great shame that some prefer to rest on their laurels and criticise, rather than offer...
  • User AvatarMatthew Huntbach 5th Dec - 4:24pm
    Peter Theresa May managed to preside over a completely shambolic attempt to deliver the referendum result. then The call for a second vote was yet...
  • User AvatarJohn Hall 5th Dec - 4:21pm
    Let us not forget that the Thatcherites quietly introduced PR for local elections into N Ireland to give minorities a fair voice, well before being...
  • User AvatarAndrew T 5th Dec - 4:14pm
    I'm dreading party infighting over a "poor" result. FPTP and the fact we are miles behind in all but a handful of constituencies combined with...
  • User AvatarPeter 5th Dec - 4:03pm
    A referendum is a mechanism for letting the people decide on an important single issue in an unambiguous way. It is normal convention for parliamentarians...
Tue 10th Dec 2019