PMQs: Nick Clegg stands in again at the Prime Minister’s insomnia cure

Due to the sad and sudden illness of David Cameron’s father, Prime Minister’s Questions had an unexpected, almost surreal, feel to them. Instead of Cameron v Harman it was back to where we were on 21st July: Clegg v Straw.

Adding to the sombre mode, Nick Clegg read out a list of no less than a dozen servicemen who have been killed over the summer, plus a doctor and a policeman who have also perished in the war zone.

The Speaker asked for “pithy” responses from the front bench. This surely could not have been a reference to the Deputy Prime Minister’s answering style, could it? Perish the thought!

Jack Straw is not particularly good at the dispatch box, in question asking mode. He comes across as anally retentive and mono-maniacal. Today he wasn’t bad but was, as usual, fairly pedestrian, dogged and repetitive. He asked if Nick Clegg is satisfied that Andy Coulson was at no time aware of illegal phone hacking at the News of the World. Nick Clegg said it was a police matter. Jack Straw kept repeating the question. Nick Clegg kept repeating the answer.

Nick Clegg did throw in a flashy, if rather irrelevant, anecdote saying that Gordon Brown was one of the first people to phone Andy Coulson when he lost his job, to commiserate with him and to express confidence that he (Coulson) would find a worthwhile role soon. This entertained one side of the House of Commons.

Jack Straw threw in Chris Huhne’s remark that Coulson had either been “complicit or incompetent”.

Nick Clegg pointed out that the previous police investigation, and its closure, happened under the previous Labour government and that Alan Johnson decided not to refer the matter to Her Majesty’s Inspector of Constabularies.

Jack Straw threw in the 2978 mobile phones that were on the police list. This caused a lot of clatter and some of them went off and inadvertently played voicemail messages. (No, I made that sentence up) And Nick Clegg threw in a list of Labour’s dodginess such as back-biting, the dodgy dossier and – said with great emphasis – “DAMIEN MCBRIDE!”

All in all, it was a great cure for insomnia.

Other points from this session of PMQs:

  • Liberal Democrat Duncan Hames (HURRAH!) asked his first question at PMQs, referring to the case of disturbing case of the treatment of Pamela Somerville at Melksham police station in Wiltshire.
  • Gregg Mcclymont (Labour) tried to catch out Nick Clegg on banks separation. He didn’t.
  • Nick Clegg made the rather clever point that 100,000 members of the public have made suggestions to the government about where spending efficiencies can be made without impacting frontline services. In sharp contrast, he said, there has not been a single suggestion from Labour about where cuts can be made. A very well-made point.
  • James Arbuthnot asked about the Chinook/Mull of Kintyre disaster and the need for an independent review on it, which Nick Clegg assured him there would be.
  • The DUP’s Gregory Campbell asked about the case of Father Chesney, to which Nick Clegg replied by emphasizing that the government had apologized for the debacle. He repeated the apology but said that there was nothing another enquiry would discover.
  • Andrea Leadsom (Con) asked about the Equitable life issue to which Nick Clegg said the government are considering the review findings.
  • Joan Walley (Labour) asked if Nick Clegg had any qualms about supporting a government which had cut 2000 staff at Job Centre pluses. Nick Clegg asked her, in smart return, if she had any qualms about supporting a government (the last one) which promised £40 billion of cuts but did not say where they would make cuts. Touché.
  • Ian Davidson (Labour) asked quite the most bizarre question imaginable! He asked if the Deputy Prime Minister was aware that it was his (Davidson’s) birthday and ‘would he like to give me two aircraft carriers as a birthday present?’ He went on about not wanting foreign aircraft carriers or sharing them with the French. This ended with a reference to our contribution to the EU budget. Barking or what? I think I just about discerned a point in there somewhere.
  • Two Labour MPs asked Nick Clegg to justify cuts when he is spending £100 million on a referendum on voting. Clegg, rightly, replied that both MPs, and their colleagues, were actually elected on a commitment to hold such a referendum, and that £20 million was being saved by having it on the same day as other elections. Labour have quite a lot of “chutzpah” these days. Some might call it “brass neck”.
  • I noticed that, in answering the now traditional question about Sheffield Forgemasters, Clegg emphasized the word “current” when he said that there was no money available in the current budget for SF. He did hold out the hope of some other form of government help.
  • Chinese lanterns also got a mention. Nick Clegg said the government would not ban them but has insisted that the manufacturers make them biodegradable and insert safety guidelines with each one.
  • If you wondered if there are still Conservatives who are outwardly nasty to Clegg on these occasions – yes, there are! There is still Sir Christopher Chope who asked whether, if the Voting Bill was amended or defeated, would the LibDems leave the coalition. Unsurprisingly the answer was ‘no’.
  • Read more by .
    This entry was posted in PMQs.
    Advert

    33 Comments

    • One of the MPs that asked about the £100m cost of the referendum was a Conervative, not Labour.

    • Paul McKeown 8th Sep '10 - 4:58pm

      Clegg did better than before, say 6/10 rather than 4/10. Glad he’s taking a more abrasive tone, PMQs is theatre, not a committee seeking consensus. He still has a lot of room to improve, though, as he hasn’t mowed down Jack Straw yet, despite Straw’s “performances” being nought but opportunistic content-free bluster.

    • Patrick Smith 8th Sep '10 - 6:16pm

      I am absolutely certain that today`s accomplished performance by the DPM Nick Clegg at Q and A`s will presage his continued strong and sensitive Liberal leadership on both domestic and international policy in the `Coalition Agreement’.

      I send my condolences to the PM on the loss of his father.

    • Nigel Rathbone 8th Sep '10 - 6:59pm

      I’m sorry, but as a former Lib Dem sympathiser and (sometimes) voter I was utterly appalled to see Nick Clegg standing up and defending Coulson today.

      Am I alone in feeling this? Coulson at the very least has very serious questions to answer, and for Clegg to attack Labour on his behalf – using put-downs and lines scripted for Cameron, for God’s sake – just beggars belief and makes him (Clegg) look ever more like the Tories’ lapdog.

    • Paul McKeown 8th Sep '10 - 7:26pm

      Hmmm, yes, Coulson does look to be in trouble and it wouldn’t be surprising if he has to go, but Labour’s leadership spent so much time toe-sucking various tabloid editors and publishers during the last thirteen years, that it also looks faintly ridiculous when it goes on the bleat. tbh it would be good to see at least one (former) tabloid editor swinging from a lamp post, if only to server as a warning to the rest.

    • Who was it who coordinated those thuggish personal attacks on Nick Clegg, leading to a loss of confidence during the second televised election debate?
      Step forward, for once, the man whom Nick generously defended today in a gradually improving performance at PMQs.

    • TheContinentalOp 8th Sep '10 - 10:10pm

      @ Andrew Tennant

      I’ve been a reader of this site for a while now and as a Lib Dem voter – as opposed to member – your tribalistic defence of everything Clegg and the Coalition does is deeply depressing. Your one response is to treat every crtiic of the coalition as if they were personally responsible for the actions of the Labour front bench.

    • You failed to answer the question.

      Why should Clegg (or anybody) pre-judge and second guess what the police will find?

      I still await the new evidence, the New York Times have made it clear they can’t (or won’t) be giving anything to the police.

    • TheContinentalOp 9th Sep '10 - 1:39am

      By offering such a defence on Coulson and the Tories behalf it seems that Clegg has already pre-judged this matter. Clegg said that Coulson had “refuted” the allegations when he clearly hasn’t. As a Lib Dem voter I wanted assurances about robust scrutiny and a clear commitment that everything possible will be done to ensure an outcome that retains the integrity of all those in Government. We didn’t get that.

      What we got was a defence on behalf of the Tory Party. Those lines were clearly penned for Cameron but personal circumstances meant it was Clegg who delivered them. Sadly Nick is looking increasingly comfortable and eager in his role of Tory lackey.

      PS Jack Straw’s PMQ performances have been awful!

    • matthew fox 9th Sep '10 - 7:36am

      Shame Clegg didn’t apologise about the Forgemasters debacle.

      It is a pity, he will never say sorry for lying.

    • @Matthew: He didn’t lie. There were lots of reasons why forgemasters didn’t get a loan – no money, a lack of commitment to further investigating private equity, the loan being promised just before the election was called (considering Labour won a seat by little under 200 votes in Sheffield, that looks like an election bribe to me), it funding less than 200 jobs, and the fact that it was public subsidy for the nuclear industry.

      Clegg’s ‘lie’ was to not list all of these at once, and so omit one or two. And as he made clear today,

      @TheContinentalOp – you are right, it would have been nice to see Clegg not defend Coulson. However, in the context of PMQs, it is fairly damning that Clegg refused to personally back him, instead merely saying Coulson denies it, and the police are investigating. Cameron would have been far more defensive. As it is, it was a Lib Dem MP (Adrian Sanders) who led calls for a full inquiry on Mon/Tues, so the Lib Dems – even if speaking from Government benches, are making it clear

      What I suspect you may agree with is that the rules for cabinet collective responsibility need to change to allow Nick to be honest [at the moment they really don’t]. Whilst much of the Media reported his Iraq comments as a ‘Gaffe’, Private Eye ran the headline ‘Shock as politician tells the truth’. So hopefully you’ll a) stick with us a little longer and b) see that not all or us will accuse you of being a Labour-ite 🙂

    • @ Andrew Tennant ‘It’s authoritarian Labour governments that seek to criminalise everyone and create new offences’

      No, Labour governments simply wish to protect people from thugs, criminals and greedy Blue and Orange small businessmen and capitalists. Such people hate regulation (which they always refer to as ‘red tape’ and infringements of civil liberties) because it prevents them from harming others and exploiting the poor. Which is why Clegg and the other Orange Tories look so comfortable defending the destruction of everything Labour set up in order to protect the proletariat and improve their lives. The sight of all those Orange and Blue Tory Millionaires rubbing their hands at the prospect of the cuts to come makes socialists like me sick. The Liberal Democrats have been unmasked and people now see them for what they really are. That’s why you are at 12% in the polls.

    • It also occurs to me that you may have forgotten that it was a Labour Government which introduced the Freedom of Information Act.

    • I think the Coulson issue goes far beyond Party politics. At worst he was incompetent if he was unaware of how his journalists were getting their stories (with the intention very often of destroying careers) or he is a liar who colluded in illegal and immoral activity repeatedly and is in a very powerful position and paid more than Clegg.

      What message is this giving out to the public? The Murdoch media also appear to have had influence on the Police investigation ensuring it was not as thorough as it should have been. This all has serious implications for our Democracy. It appears elements of our Media are above the law and some mebers of the MET police are under their influence? Who has more power in this country our democratically elected Govt or the Media (and the growing Murdoch empire). I suspect unfortunately our recent governments know the answer to this.
      It’s a very depressing thought – that what our children see, read and watch will increasingly be fed to them through Murdoch’s media channels and gutter press. Soon many will be unable to think for themselves. Not good for the future of the Country.
      Clegg doesn’t appear to be endorsing Coulson….. but there again ..didn’t help matters when he threw in the piece about Brown contacting Coulson or perhaps it highlighted how our govts feel to keep in with the powerful in the Country. It should go beyond just Labour calling for investigations this goes to the heart of our Democracy.
      http://www.38degrees.org.uk/page/s/murdoch

    • TheContinentalOp 9th Sep '10 - 10:55am

      Yes Andrew, Lib Dem voter. Thanks for questioning that, puting words into my mouth and confirming your tribalistic arrogance. It’s increasingly clear that you view anyone with an opinion varied to your own as incapable of being a Lib Dem voter.

      If you don’t think someone who expresses my viewpoint on the NOTW affair can possibly be a Lib Dem voter than you are more out of touch with the party’s electoral support than you can possibly imagine. As isolated from reality as the New Labour you understandably loath.

    • MacK, every point you make disappointing in tone and attitude. And your rather crass attempt above to create some kind of artificial divide is also weak and full of either ignorance, wilful ignorance, or malice.

      Val, I agree with some of your points, but it has gone beyong just Labour calling for investigations – Lib Dems are as well (see above). It is, however, difficult for Clegg at the dispatch box – so we’ll see what happens next.

    • @Andrew Tennant.
      and in the case of Tony Blair speaking out against it and saying it was a mistake.

      I think that Blair said that because he was convinced that it inhibited people from speaking their minds when in Government. But then, of course, Blair is not a socialist. Nevertheless, despite its shortcomings the Freedom of Information Act is a huge achievement and certainly disproves the lie that Labour is a totalitarian party. It certainly wasn’t Labour’s only proud achievement, as you suggest, but I’m not going to be tedious and produce a long list. Those sympathetic to Labour know what those achievements were. I do agree, however, that we wasted our majorities by trying to reduce the importance of the state and giving in to big business. I also regret that Labour forgot its grass roots activists and the enormous imput they had to give, particularly at party conference. That’s why we lost touch and began to be seen as only concerned with an elite. I see that happening now to the Lib Dems. I certyainly hope that Labour’s new leader will produce a more socialist agenda and a more collective approach to policymaking.

    • @TheContintentalOp – I believe you are a Lib Dem voter, and please ignore the related, and disappointing tribalism displayed above (from Andrew and MacK) There are Lib Dem MPs raising this in parliament, I just think it is a little difficult for Clegg at the moment until notions of cabinet responsibility are adjusted to deal with a coalition…

    • Yes, but the tone is less helpful, I think as a) some people are finding difficulties with our clear campaigning before the election and our cabinet members’ caution now – which is a reasonable concern and b) you phrase ‘needs prompt and stern correction!’ – clearly windign me up 🙂

    • TheContinentalOp 9th Sep '10 - 12:11pm

      You throw about terms like “Us” and “Their” and wonder why you are accused of tribalism!?!

      Strangely it appears there are plenty of Lib Dem MPs who don’t agree with you on this issue. Perhaps you should contact them to offer a “prompt” and “Stern” (LOL!!) correction. I’m sure they will be delighted to know they are in the wrong party.

      I’d say the reality is that the policies of the Coalition is much closer to your own political heart than the Lib Dem manifesto I voted for in May.

    • TheContinentalOp 9th Sep '10 - 12:24pm

      Thank you George and Henry for your comments.

      I can only speak for myself but reports that Lib Dem voters – as opposed to activists and members etc – are ready to depart the party in large numbers are in my opinion wildly exagerated. I’ve seen the other options and I’m going nowhere. But we do have concerns where all this us going.

    • @ Henry
      “MacK, every point you make disappointing in tone and attitude. And your rather crass attempt above to create some kind of artificial divide is also weak and full of either ignorance, wilful ignorance, or malice.”

      The divide is not artificial and it will go on widening as long as the Orange Tories appear to see everything from the perspective of the Blue Tories. I stand by every point I have made above.

    • Stand by it all you like MacK. I am committed to liberty and equality of opportunity. The real divides – the gender pay gap, the social mobility gap, all got worse under Labour. I hope, hope, there is some prospect of improvement because of the Lib Dem influence.

    • Ray Cobbett 9th Sep '10 - 6:42pm

      Clegg put in the best performance yet but has a way to go . Straw
      is hardly serious competition, sounding and lookiing like an old man.
      His hatred of Lib Dems is deep and long standing. The real test is
      when Milliband D get going. A smoother operator with the same tailor as
      Clegg and Cameron. Labour bashing probably has no more than 3 months
      left to run before the real fun starts.

    • @ Henry?

      Liberty? Oh, you mean the right for charlatans and criminals to claim that sensible regulations which protect people are red tape and an infringement of civil liberties? Equaity of opportunity? Removing the right of 600,000 children to free school meals? Gender? Why is Osborne’s budget being challenged in the courts for gender unfairness under legislation which Labour introduced? Social mobility? That disappeared when the Blue Tories allowed people to buy the national housing stock. Keep hoping.

    • 1) Red tape, civil liberties and protection can always be a long debate – I probably agree with you that not all the ‘red tape’ being removed was bad red tape – some was good, but that is because coalition involved compromise. Given that both Labour and the Tories wanted to scrap/alter the Human Rights Act, we have gained a major triumph over both parties in this coalition by shooting this down.

      2) Removing the right of 600,000 children to free school meals? This policy was regressive as it did not benefit the poorest, who get free school meals automatically and continue to do so. You are essentially complaining that we took away an unfunded and unfair tax break for middle-class parents. (This has an exact parallel with the £10,000 tax band which you opposed because it didn’t benefit the pooret – it is just that your policy is more illiberal than the other.)

      3) Why is Osborne’s budget being challenged in the courts… Because Labour want an opportunity to get some headlines. But also note that a) something being taken to court doesn’t make it true, b) the fact that Labour introduced legislation doesn’t mean they solved the problem (you can’t, as Blair/Brown/Miliband never seemed to understand, legislate away every problem) and c) I can only assume by your silence that you do not object to the actual substantive claim in my point that gender inequality went up under Labour.

      4) I agree that the selling of the housing stock, and Labour’s inability to rebuild it, was a failure of the Conservatives and Labour administrations. Thanks to our influence on the coalition, councils will now be freer to create more housing and the Government will build more social housing (if I remember the announcement correclty). In addition, you again fail to tackle the point that social mobility got worse under Labour.

    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.

    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

    • nigel hunter
      DEI has indeed taken the reason for young men to exist when one of its priorities, for example, is the empowerment of women so that young men feel left out. The...
    • Joseph Bourke
      The UK strategic defence review appears to be being rapidly overtaken by events. The review was ordered to deliver answers for a defence budget that will increa...
    • Joseph Bourke
      Echoing France's Napoleon Bonaparte, U.S. President Donald Trump on Saturday took to social media to signal continued resistance to limits on his executive auth...
    • Slamdac
      "Mainstream parties are perceived as having done more to exacerbate the problems for young men with their support for diversity, equality and inclusion (DEI) pr...
    • Nigel Quinton
      Whatever happened to Torsten Bell when he became an MP? (And now Pensions Minister). His interview on Politics Joe "Why Britain is Poor" in 2023 as summarised b...