What a 'tosser'

Loz Wed Nov 29, 2006 at 08:54:20 PM GMT Print-friendly version Facebook

Did anyone happen to see PMQS today?

Surely somebody else could be put up to doing PMQS. Prescott has had most of his other jobs taken from him.

Usually, it's a laugh (mostly at him, but he can crack a good joke every now and then), but even by his own awful standards, it was an embarrassment.

How pathetic does the Labour Party look when a quick clever and informed debater like Hague comes up against a man that could do little more than throw out insults, a man that has next to no credibility and a man with about as good a grasp of the facts as I do of Kazakhstan politics.

For all his many faults, I always quite liked Prescott because I like many others perceived him to be honest, and Labour to the core. In light of his shameful conduct, I find it hard to believe he could be given such a responsibility, not withstanding the fact he's as honourable as Jeffrey Archer, the man is terrible at his job.

That  being said, any suggestions as to who could have been put up to the job?

Would have been nice to perhaps throw somebody like David Miliband in there or perhaps John Reid.






tags: , (all tags)

Display: Sort:
What a 'tosser' | 13 comments (13 topical)

Re: What a 'tosser' (#1)

by bornin84 on Wed Nov 29, 2006 at 09:09:53 PM GMT

No, if you put someone else in it would just cause problems with endless discussion about what it meant! If you put Gordon Brown in then its because there's not going to be a leadership contest. John Reid then its a snub to Brown. Miliband then its a test and maybe we should skip a generation.

With John Prescott its just him being himself and hopefully won't get a lot of attention.


Re: What a 'tosser' (#2)

by Loz on Wed Nov 29, 2006 at 09:15:18 PM GMT

Do you not think it would be discussion of the right sort?

Do you really think the average voter will care about what it means for the Labour party?

If anything, surely that they'll think it was the right thing to slap down john prescott?


[ Parent ]

Re: What a 'tosser' (#3)

by bornin84 on Wed Nov 29, 2006 at 09:37:30 PM GMT

I firmly believe that John Prescott should have been sacked and should not even be in the position...but that's in the past, is he where he still is!

I understand your point of view about it formulating some kind of constructive discussion, but maybe this would only happen if everyone who wanted it was given the chance! But it is after all PMQs and Tony Blair is only off for one week!

I would worry that if just one person was given the opportunity (say John Reid) then this would just create too much infighting.


[ Parent ]

Re: What a 'tosser' (#4)

by alexhilton on Wed Nov 29, 2006 at 09:56:15 PM GMT

John Prescott is the Deputy Prime Minister because the Prime Minister appointed him to the position. The Labour Party doesn't even pretend to want the position elected by the membership and if you want this, you should campaign for a rule change.

That said, if JP had been encouraged to be "off sick" on this occasion, then it would make sense to have Beckett stand in. Failing that, Straw as Leader of the Commons would be appropriate as it has been the norm for that office holder to do so when DPM's have not existed.


[ Parent ]

Re: What a 'tosser' (#5)

by Andrea on Wed Nov 29, 2006 at 10:08:34 PM GMT

"That said, if JP had been encouraged to be "off sick" on this occasion, then it would make sense to have Beckett stand in. Failing that, Straw as Leader of the Commons would be appropriate as it has been the norm for that office holder to do so when DPM's have not existed. "

In October 2005 when both Blair and Prescott were out of the country, Hoon as Leader of the House took PMQs.

So if Prescott had been sick, I suppose there would have been the chance to see Straw vs Theresa May.


[ Parent ]

Re: What a 'tosser' (#6)

by swatantra on Thu Nov 30, 2006 at 08:54:25 AM GMT

The only 'tosser' in the Chamber on Wednesday was Prescott, but Hague was too much of a gentleman to remind Prescott of his affair with Tracey.


[ Parent ]

Re: What a 'tosser' (#7)

by swatantra on Thu Nov 30, 2006 at 08:57:04 AM GMT

In which case we should vote for Crudas, the only contestant who could bring this about. The fact is we do need a rule change, to have the voice of ordinary members in the Cabinet.


[ Parent ]

Re: What a 'tosser' (#9)

by alexhilton on Thu Nov 30, 2006 at 10:50:45 AM GMT

swantantra, in what way do the rules change if JC is elected deputy? In no way at all as far as I can tell.


[ Parent ]

Re: What a 'tosser' (#10)

by swatantra on Thu Nov 30, 2006 at 10:57:29 AM GMT

Crudas is the only candidate willing to raise the whole issue of the role of a DL and DPM and who they should be answerable to... ie us ordinary party members. The DL of the Party should not be in the gift of the PM but the choice of the membership at large.


[ Parent ]

Re: What a 'tosser' (#8)

by TrueLabour on Thu Nov 30, 2006 at 10:39:54 AM GMT

It reminds me of what Tony said before the 97 election to John Major at PMQs.

Weak, weak, weak.....


Re: What a 'tosser' (#11)

by Loz on Thu Nov 30, 2006 at 10:31:54 PM GMT

And there was me thinking about another famous line of prescotts.....


[ Parent ]

Re: What a 'tosser' (#12)

by MM on Fri Dec 01, 2006 at 01:28:27 AM GMT

Does it really matter?  What are the viewing figures for PMQ?  I really car'nt imagine that millions of people tune into the Daily Politics or listen to Five Live at 12:00 for PMQ.  It's very rarely covered on the main news these days.

I would imagine most of the people that watched or listened to PMQ on Wednesday were political junkies who watch every week, and who have traditional party loyalties just like political blog users.  So would Prescott using a jibe or Hague asking a witty question swing votes?

Personally I found this weeks PMQ jolly good fun, it might be very un-pc to say so but i'm a huge fan of a little bit of punch and judy politics from time to time in the Commons.  Many of my fellow ungraduates at University also agree with me on this point.

It's interesting that a number of Parliamentary sketch writers gave Prescott the thumbs up for his performance yesterday.  I thought his jibe at Vince Cable was amusing ditto the last joke at the Tories was amusing.  Perhaps we should lighten up a little?  

Sky's Chief Political Correspondent's thoughts:
http://adamboulton.typepad.com/my_weblog/2006/11/pmqs_29th_novem.html


Re: What a 'tosser' (#13)

by Loz on Fri Dec 01, 2006 at 03:41:11 PM GMT

Most of the papers covered it, and most of the news shows has at least that quick exchange.

The point is, it looks bad.

The Sketches are hardly a great measure of public perception, which by even the daily politics own reading was dire in the extreme, even for Labour areas, and Labour voters.

A quick clip here, a news cutting here. Sooner or later you've got a 6,7 or 8 point Tory lead. Ooooppps, we already do.

Its simply not good enough.

If you actually believe in the principle behind PMQS, i.e. for a representative of the government to answer questions in parliament, then Prescotts nonsense compared to Hagues informed and perhaps a little elitist approach comes off better.

The public worried about their pensions for example will be alarmed firstly at the magnitude of Hagues claims, and secondly at how ill informed our DPM is. Furthermore, he had in the end to resort to namecalling.

Now while some of us, myself included have on occasions thouroughly enjoyed this banter, it was because we could all have a laugh at the both of them, but now, grubby and disgusting oaf Prescott lacks any appeal at all. Hague on the other hand, stuck to being the opposition and made Prescott look stupid. (not a joke btw)


[ Parent ]

What a 'tosser' | 13 comments (13 topical)