PMQs: social housing and repossession

Cameron and Brown wrangle over the various parliamentary reform proposals. Cameron uses the election of two BNP MEPs to support his contention that a proportional system lets in extremists, and accuses Brown of only becoming interested in reform when he faces losing the next election. Brown looks somewhat less like a punchbag this week – that Monday night meeting of the parliamentary Labour party must have pepped him up a bit. In fact, his righteousness waxes so great that he proclaims Cameron “doesn’t deserve” to be Prime Minister.

Clegg asks about repossession rates, which he says the government is failing to slow, and the slow pace of social housing building programmes. Brown essentially replies – insofar as it’s possible to distil an essence from anything he says – that Clegg’s figures are wrong, and reels off a stack of statistics which don’t appear to relate precisely to the terms of Clegg’s question. They follow the usual Brown pattern – “We are shovelling money at it, therefore it is not a problem.” Clegg’s response is simple: if all that is true, why are there 70% more families waiting to be rehoused now than in 1997?

It’s a good point that deserved a bit more power behind it – as with many other problems supposedly right up their street, Labour have had twelve years to sort this problem out. A recession and the resultant housing problems has merely highlighted their failure to do so.

Clegg’s delivery was rather on the weak side today, although he is getting better at not getting tripped up by the hecklers. He got very heavy heckling from the Labour benches today – and no help from the speaker. It seems understood by all participants that as far as Martin is concerned, Clegg is on his own from now until Martin stands down.

In all, a rather wan PMQs following on from the fireworks from last week. Clegg, somewhat to my surprise has proven over the last couple of months that he actually excels at big, rude questions (viz, “Aren’t you a bit stupid?… At least I say it to his face!”) and broadbrush political ideology question (“The choice this country faces is between the Tories and the Liberal Democrats.”) Today’s questions would have been well used driving some wedges into the other two party’s positions on electoral reform.

Read more by or more about , , or .
This entry was posted in News.
Advert

4 Comments

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

  • Chris Moore
    There are oscillations in many features of the climate. The possible 60 year Arctic sea ice oscillation you mention doesn't contradict an anthropogenic effe...
  • Chris Moore
    Cancel Tory conference: what a ridiculous piece of rhetoric! On the reasoning here, you'd cancel nearly all conferences of the governing party. "There ar...
  • Tom Harney
    I find this article alarming. As a democrat I believe that a conference is a means of the members of a party having a say in the running of the party. I note al...
  • Jeff
    ‘Is there a quasi-60 years' oscillation of the Arctic sea ice extent’ [2015]: https://researchonline.jcu.edu.au/38582/ The Arctic sea ice expe...
  • Jeff
    Russia’s dependence on Chinese markets, sanctions busting finance and political support is turning it into a vassal of Beijing. Maybe they should ho...