Wednesday, November 12, 2008

PMQs: Shame on Gordon Brown



Gordon Brown brought shame on his office during today's PMQs. He accused David Cameron of playing party politics over the tragic death of Baby P in Haringey. He had, of course, done nothing of the sort. Cameron had put some very simple questions to Brown, none of which he even attempted to answer. Cameron then got angry - and rightly so - and demanded the PM withdrew his accusation of playing party politics. Brown obfuscated three times. By the end of the exchange, Cameron was fizzing with anger. It will be interesting to see how this exchange is viewed by the political commentariat and also by viewers. It left me disgusted that we have a Prime Minister who is willing to stoop into the gutter like this. Tony Blair would never have done it.

Nick Clegg asked two very long winded questions on tax cuts, which he demanded would be "big, fair and permanent". His definition of "big" would be interesting. Brown brushed him aside with his usual contempt.

In some ways, this whole session showed PMQs at its worst. Independent observers will wonder what the point of it is. Brown rarely answers a question from either Clegg or Cameron and is just plain nasty. Cameron got very angry over a very emotive issue today and I don't blame him. Brown showed himself to be a very little man today, and I cannot believe any neutral observer can have been anything other than disgusted by him.

If any Conservative wanted a bit of steel inserted into their backbone, Brown did that today. Roll on the day that he is kicked out of the building he no longer deserves to inhabit.

Scores on the doors...

Brown 2
Cameron 9
Clegg 4

UPDATE: Jon Cruddas just said: "This did not shine a good light on my own party". Too bloody right. He also refused to defend his Prime Minister. The Daily Politics viewers are outraged by Brown.

158 comments:

Irfan Ahmed said...

Balls, thats all I can say about Cameron getting 9. Stop rubbing your own back and face facts. I would give Cameron a 6.

Anonymous said...

You have it wrong Iain, Brown does not just stoop into the gutter, he's there permanently. Everything the man touches and says proves he is rotten to the core. Just plain nasty is about right.

Lady Finchley said...

My God, Brown was absolutely vile. Anybody could tell that David Cameron was righteously angry, not as a politician, not only as a parent but a right thinking human being who was shocked by the behaviour of the filth who murdered that child. Brown has sunk to the deepest depths on this one - almost as low as the scum who were supposed to be the guardians of Baby P. I only hope that they meet a gruesome fate inside - they certainly should never be allowed to reproduce again and I would happily provide the pliers.

Oliver Drew said...

Gotta say that I missed PMQs today, but if your report is accurate (and I'm certain it is), then I am disgusted. I hope that I'll be able to watch it later on to see what occurred.

I must admit I'm amazed, it's not like Brown has been having a bad time of it lately, he seems to be reveling in this countries misfortune (which is disgusting in itself I might add). So, to make such a gaffe, a nasty comment, is really, really stupid (from a political point of view). From any other point of view, it's just nasty.

Anonymous said...

What a vile digusting creature this Dictator of England Broon is, and how does her get away withj never answering a single question?, no doubt its because he has a fellow Scotch McLabour communist as McSpeaker!.

Get your bags packed and ready Broon, England doesnt want YOU or McLabour!.

Anonymous said...

Hmm, not sure you are right, Iain. I was shocked by what Brown said but then again I was almost equally surprised that Cameron was pushing it in the way he was (to all intents and purposes, for party political gain). I suspect Cameron calculated that Brown would never call him up on it, so he wanted to gain some advantage in a subtle way. Brown just called his bluff. I think neither will come out of it looking too good. As for the overall performance, a low score draw (5-5).

Anonymous said...

Shame. Gordon Brown.

Nah. You're thinking of someone else...

David Boothroyd said...

But Cameron was playing party politics over Baby P. If the Leader of the Opposition brings up a matter at Prime Minister's questions, it is making it party political. He didn't need to mention the party control of Haringey. And when Gordon Brown quite rightly pointed it out, I notice that Cameron let his anger get the better of him, because he was intending to ask about something else in the later questions.

But Cameron managed to do his customary accidental-deliberate lapse into referring to Gordon Brown as "you". The Speaker had better take such action as will prevent any further abuse of Parliamentary procedure.

John Gibson said...

Brown lives down to expectations once again. What utter scum.

Lord Elvis said...

Brown is a bastard!

Iain Dale said...

David, I can tell by your defence that you don't really believe it. It is very weak to say that just bringing it up at PMQs makes it party political. What utter tripe.

Rob said...

"Brown has sunk to the deepest depths on this one - almost as low as the scum who were supposed to be the guardians of Baby P"

Yes. Brown is a baby killer. Of course.

In truth, Cameron allowed himself to be seriously thrown off-course at this PMQs. He was going, as he said initially, to ask questions about the economy but allowed himself to get angry and be distracted. Instead of pressing the PM on the unemployment figures he wasted two questions on parliamentary procedure - something Tony Blair would truly never have done.

Anonymous said...

Agree, although Cameron ought to have been briefed that the mother wasn't 17...

It's at times like this I really do think hard and wonder if he honestly cares or is just thinking what will play well in the Sun. Normally I assume the latter but I'm giving him the benefit of the doubt this time.

Anonymous said...

No Doubt Chris Paul will pop up in a minute to explain why Cameron's behaviour was so outrageous that he is little better than a child-murderer himself.

David Boothroyd said...

Then you tell wrong. For what it's worth, I think Cameron was disreputable in bringing the matter up, and would have deserved a more severe rebuke than he actually got. Having received it, he was very petulant to demand its withdrawal.

There have plenty of scurrilous attacks on Brown at PMQs which ought not to have been made. Brown, who is a statesman, would not demand withdrawal. Cameron, who is a petty party politician, does. That is a difference of substance. I note no Conservative backbencher followed up the issue.

Laurence Boyce said...

Brown is not "plain nasty" Iain, you go too far. But he is not fit to be Prime Minister - we know that. Nor is he mandated to be Prime Minister, having never been elected by the nation or even his own party. Our haphazard constitutional arrangements let us down every time.

Man in a Shed said...

Brown is just too partisan, and sees everything in terms of how to attack the Conservatives.

What this exchange also shows is that Cameron can think on his feet. He clearly dropped his second subject for questions, the economy, to focus on the shameless smear Brown had just uttered.

I assume irfan ahmed belongs to Dolly merry band of astro-turfers, however I'm not sure I'd score this at all, except to outline my disgust with Gordon Brown and how it exposes the deep flaws in the man.

Lady Finchley said...

You know Rob, people complain about politicians but when they are truly outraged and angered for a good and righteous reason people still complain. Of course unemployment is of paramount importance but so is human life. Get with the programme.

Rex said...

Browns problem seems to be that he can only read the script (probably written by the repulsive Campbell. Clearly Cameron's question about the sad baby's case was not on the list of Brown's replies.
It just showed his lack of humanity, understanding and ability to think on his feet.

All of you labour supporters that read and praise Brown on this blog I hope that this will show you the real Brown....... Utterly dispicable!

HF said...

Jon Cruddas was very impressive.

Peter Briffa said...

Cruiously, Brown's predecessor seemed to think that the murder of James Bulger was "the ugly manifestation of a society no longer worthy of the name".

http://andrewrilstone.blogspot.com/2006/10/public-enemy.html

Will Brown now condemn Tony Blair for being "party political"?

norman said...

David B:
"But Cameron was playing party politics over Baby P.."

You sound as despicable as Brown. We pride ourselves as a decent civilised country and the Labour Leaders assured after Crobie's case it will not happen again. Have you seen that poor 17 month old child's face? David Cameron is right to ask this question and pursue it,if you David B and Brown are uncomfortable with the question and say what you and Brown are saying, shame on you and him. We know what Labour is now. In Labour's regime a child is battered to death, teen agers are knifed to death almost every week and Labour will create boom and bust and we should all sing@ hail they chief' to bottler Brown, and that is what you and Labour is saying.

Anonymous said...

Sorry Iain, but f**k Brown and f**k Labour! They plumbed new depths today and it's not just Cameron that is fuming.

Libertarian said...

David (twice) - you are plain wrong on this. Cameron was dead right to raise this horrendous issue in the Chamber, he was right to have been utterly appalled at the reaction from the PM; and no Tory followed up, because what else was there to say? It was not party political at all, the PM made it so, not Cameron.
Brown disgraced himself and his office and party today, as did those baying behind him.

Andrew Efiong said...

Brown is usually furtive at PMQs, unable to give a straight answer but he came across as especially slippery and sly today.

Why can't he answer the questions? What is the point of PMQs and The Speaker if the PM can just reply with unrelated answers.

Also, I detected that the PM loves to lecture on the (failing) economy and was completely blown off course by questions outside this domain. He's certainly enjoying the recession as he tries to cover up his tracks that led us to this failure but he can't get away with this for much longer as unemployment and repossessions head for record levels.

strapworld said...

Iain,

I have never been so angry as I was watching Brown. He was beneath contempt. I have also complained to the BBC about Robinson. How on God's earth he can place himself in the mind of Cameron I just do not know. Anything to attempt to get Brown off the hook!

I actually thought the Speaker did well and realised what Brown had done and was trying to help Brown! But Brown proved that he is a one trick pony and cannot stop making 'politics' out of anything EVEN if it is the slaughter of a baby.

Absolutely disgraceful and he will rue the day.

strapworld said...

I have just read david boothroyd. You sir, are as bad as the leader of your contemptible party.

NOT bring up this disgraceful murder under a Socialist Council FOR THE SECOND TIME!

Wrinkled Weasel said...

Brown displays many of the classic symptoms of psychopathy. (Don't believe me? Check it.)

I only managed to see a shortened clip of PMQs. It seemed to me that Cameron was being perfectly reasonable and that Brown was reading from a prepared response list. I saw no indication that Brown was empathising with the issue of Baby P, or engaging with Cameron's questions.

Brown has made a mockery of our democracy. PMQ's is really a paradigm of his true attitude.

norman said...

David B

"Brown, who is a statesman ..."

Is he? Only you and the rest of Labour sheep will keep on believing this outrage that this bottler is a statesman. He is a small-minded Fife Labour party apparatchik so say Brown's ex-colleagues from that Technical College he taught Sociology before he became an MP.
What is Labour today heaping worship on their Fuhrer?

Anonymous said...

These sorts of cases are highly complex and emotive. What could Cameron possibly hope to achieve by raising it in the bearpit of PMQs? Absolutely nothing. Like it or not, he was playing party politics and in my view showed himself to be utterly disgusting. Whether Brown was wise to pick him up on this is another question. Probably not, but he was correct.

Glyn H said...

Brown; a Statesman? he is the most partisan, politically inept, socially incompetant, malign and vindictive politicain to have held such office (Ok, OK Prescott, but he only had power to sod up local government, planning, etc, not the whole economy). Cameron was right to drop the script, think on his feet; he did get angry and Brown was a fool not to see the better part would have been to have back-tracked, but as usual his clunking ineptness prevented what would have been a good move and taken the wind out of Camerons sails.

dick the prick said...

David - how can you justify that this is not a parliamentary matter.

The police get investigated by the IPCC as soon as anyone dies. All officers involved are investigated by a senior officer from another division.

Yet the Director of Safeguarding children investigates her own and publicly states that no-one will be sacked.

The inquiry MUST be independant.

I think you're incredibly nieve.

WV: knuters - quite.

John Pickworth said...

I believe the PM (not just Brown, Blair was as bad) should be duty bound to provide answers to the questions asked at PMQs. If necessary, The Speaker should keep them there all flippin' day if necessary.

It never used to be this bad... Thatcher could be quite combative at times (and surprisingly so was Major) but they always gave a direct answer.

Brown deserved what he got today. Reap what you sow.

Cameron, now I'm not sure if he was genuinely angry (he certainly looked it) or was playing it up a bit? But this is exactly what the country wants to see. Millions of us are sat here unable to take a stick to those who have made such a mess of things but Cameron can.

For me...

Cameron 10 (no hesitation in giving him that)
Brown 0 (you couldn't give him more)

By the way, I want PMQs back on twice a week. I don't even know why they changed it, they didn't ask us - typical.

Anonymous said...

Nick Robinson on Daily Politics speculated that Cameron was pretending to be Angry.

Cameron should put an official complaint into the BBC.

David Boothroyd said...

If the Leader of the Opposition raises an issue at Prime Minister's Question Time and demands an answer from the Prime Minister, it is by definition a party political issue. I think all the Tory comments here give the game away: if it was not a party political issue, then you should not be making party political attacks on Gordon Brown over his response. As always, Strapworld gives the game away.

I hope you're all aware that Haringey wanted to take Baby P into care, but twice went to counsel and were told that there was not enough of a legal base to do so.

James Higham said...

Independent observers will wonder what the point of it is.

Indeed and party politics in general.

Howard said...

One of the most shameful performances from a PM that I have ever witnessed. This will do him real and lasting damage and deservedly so.

What a small and pitiful man Brown is.

Anonymous said...

As other observers are noting, Gordon Brown is an odious, nasty individual, and my contempt for him knows no limits. I am truly ashamed that this horrible, unelected man is the Prime Minister of our once great country.

david said...

sorry, the stuff coming out of brown and boothroyd is making me steaming mad.

how utterly pathetic to even attempt to dismiss cameron's and the nation's concern with what is an horrific act.

when we saw the news last night, my friend who has zero political affiliation or interest was absolutely disgusted. he has a boy the same age and he was spitting mad. how can it happen so soon and by the same council? is that party politicis???

David B's GP said...

David B:

Enough of your meaningless observation. You have forgotten to take your tablets again. Go home and take the tablets I prescribed and take the a couple of days off to let the tablets work. Otherwise, you may need a stronger medication and intervention.

lunartalks said...

Lord Elvis: no, Brown's parents were married.

In my experience, bastards exhibit far higher standards of behaviour than Mr Brown.

(Word ver: owllypo. A government funded programme for fat owls, I suppose)

Dave H. said...

A bit silly to comment not having seen PMQ, but having seen how Brown lies both shamelessly and absurdly in order to further his interests it would not surprise me if he were an utter shit too. He generally comes across as weird and repulsive.

And this is the Son of the Manse, supposedly in possession of a moral compass found to be so sadly missing from Tony "pretty straight kind of guy" Blair.

Will we ever get one that does what it says on the tin?

Daily Referendum said...

Davisd Boothroyd,

"If the Leader of the Opposition raises an issue at Prime Minister's Question Time and demands an answer from the Prime Minister, it is by definition a party political issue."

No it's not you arse, it's a political issue, some of which are party political and some of which are not. This obviously was not.

Lady Finchley said...

Boothroyd

Learn how to spell council please and it is a Labour council not 'counsel' by the way.

ian said...

Jeez, Boothroyd, you'd support an amoeba if it wore a red rosette.
Contemptible ain't in it.

Peter Wilson said...

The BBC normally puts up the full version PMQs not long after it has finished, but now they've only put up an abbreviated version on their website which misses out the initial questions from Cameron, which makes Cameron look like he's trying to score cheap political points.

More subtle bias from the BBC

Anonymous said...

Lady Finchley 1.34 - I think you'll find it was meant they sought legal COUNSEL. I am no fan of, nor defender of Brown on this issue, but if DB is right and they did go to COUNSEL then that is a matter for the investigation too.

Ross said...

I used to think that Brown's professional shortcomings weren't moral failings. This is no longer the case, the man is utterly despicable with an utter void where a conscience should be.

Anonymous said...

i was apalled by the prolonged torture of this baby, genuinely really distressed. i feel sullied by it. i asked what was the point of the climbie enquiry? all the reports reviews meetings, MILLIONS spent for what? and then Cameron asks the same question and gets acused of playing party politics.

Brown and his henchmen are beneath contempt. they have no empathy

the badger's todger said...

Boothroyd, you scrote

Brown accused Cameron of "creating party politics". There is a difference between raising a question at PMQs and manufacturing a dispute between the parties out of child murder. But then again,

"Iss party political -- iss party political -- cos you Tories said iss party political -- ner ner -- you Tories all the same -- party political -- let the cat out of the bag -- can't turn round now and say wasn't party political -- issa Tories issa Tories -- party political."

Muppet. And now you cap it off by giving Harringey a clean bill of health.

I'll put it down to incorrigible stupidity. Others might call you a moral cripple.

SPLAT! said...

I officially declare that the Brown bounce is over.

Anonymous said...

I say well done to David Cameron for sticking to his guns and showing a REAL concern and anger over the way way children are looked after, it is quite easy for any person who have more than one brain cell to tell the difference between genuine anger and emotion like Cameron showed today....as opposed to the lying inept cringe-worthy traitorous megalomaniac Bliar with his cringe-worthy fake lip quivering over princess Diana!!!!.

Broon OUT!!!!
McLabour OUT!!!!!!!!

Cath said...

Er lady f I think Boothroyd did mean counsel, there is a difference between council and counsel and, as much as I think he is being an arse in defending the indifensible Brown today, I do believe he is is aware of the difference.

Dave H. said...

to anon @12:45 to save you the irksome bother of visiting CP's blog, which he so appositely refers to as LOL, today's posting likens Guido Fawkes to the child-killing parents of Baby P.

It makes a pleasant change from the howling nut-job slagging off Iain. I noticed last night we are nearing a full moon.

dizzy said...

"If the Leader of the Opposition raises an issue at Prime Minister's Question Time and demands an answer from the Prime Minister, it is by definition a party political issue."

So if the Leader of the Opposition gets to ask the Prime minister to list his engagement for today that is party political? What a pile fo crap you speak David.

Lord Elvis said...

Lumartalks. If I used the word that really sums up Brown, Iain wouldn't post it.

But it starts with a 'c'...

His is an odious ballbag. I've known cases of jock itch that had more humanity in them.

ross said...

If the Tories, on their pathetic, point-scoring high horses about this awful crime, want to make it party political, then let them. Let them then explain what help their whole political philosophy of less government intervention in families' lives would mean for dozens if not hundreds of other innocent children at serious risk of similar torture and death. You can't help social services save child's lives by slashing budgets to let well-off people keep a few pence more of their wages a week.

Shamik said...

I agree with your comments on Brown.

What a disgraceful individual - the sooner he's got rid of the better.

Glenrothes may have given him some breathing space, but fingers crossed, he'll be booted out of office sooner rather than later.

Stalin's great grand son said...

My great grandfather appears as a medium now and then and tells me that he has entered the body of British Prime Minister Brown. Hello PM of Britain, Hello great grandad!!

Lola said...

'Kicked out of the building' - stand in line. I bags that my boot is first up the bum of useless deceitful disfunctional berk.

Newmania said...

Oh come on Iain. Brown was in charge Labour Election Strategy when they used the truly random Bulger case as a pictorial aid

Naturally he has delicate sensibilities....

David said...

Rob 12:43. Of course Brown is a baby killer. This war criminal funded Blair's wars on Serbia, Afghanistan and Iraq.

jon dee said...

Spin-doctors could not hide Gordon Browns repulsive personality at PMQs today.His bombast in response to Camerons questions on Baby P was sickening.
He needs professional help, perhaps Draper could provide it.

David Boothroyd said...

Word of advice to David Cameron - if you want to keep something out of party politics, don't make it the subject of all six of your questions at Prime Minister's Question Time.

What he must have realised is that once the Leader of the Conservative Party raises an issue in such a fundamentally partisan forum as Prime Minister's Questions, the Prime Minister is bound to state his position, and any difference between the two automatically becomes a party political question.

This is all about Cameron wanting to have his cake and eat it. He wanted to make covert party political criticism and pretend he had no party interest. Shame on him for doing so.

JuliaM said...

"I think all the Tory comments here give the game away..."

David Booothroyd must be some computer whizz, to be able to discern a person's political leanings from plain text on a webpage!

"More subtle bias from the BBC"

It isn't even really subtle, anymore, is it?

Iain Dale said...

David, you are embarrassing yourself now. David Cameron had clearly not intended to use all 6 questions on this issue. He was going to use the last three to go on the economy., But when his integrity was impugned he was left with little alternative but to hit back. That's not party politics, it's called self defence. Brown was the one who brought party politics into it, and boy is he going to live to regret it.

Anonymous said...

If this had happened in a Conservative Controlled Council would Cameron have asked all his PMQ questions about it?

And before anyone comes back and says "of course he would" think before you press post - you know he would not have...

Anonymous said...

He should have let Lynne Featherstone bring it up if it needed to be discussed in the Commons. It happened in her backyard.

Byeck said...

Quite agree with Cameron, but if it's wrong for Social Services to investigate themselves, (and it is) then how can it be right for Honourable Members to police themselves?

Ross said...

Even the Guardian is pretty damning about Brown. The ever loyal Brown defender Michael White can do no better than to adopt a "plague on both your houses" approach, whereas his colleague Gaby Hinsliff writes:

"Cameron ended up articulating the hopeless, choked anger of many parents who will have found the details of Baby P's suffering almost unbearable to hear and cannot accept that nobody is to blame. Brown did not.

.....

It also raises the uncomfortable question Labour MPs are quietly pondering: given that Brown hasn't essentially changed as a politician, merely seen the times around him change to something he is well-positioned for, will he revert to being unpopular when it's over? Could he win the recession just in time to lose the recovery?"

somebody agreeing with Iain said...

Having watched all the Daily Politics today including PMQs I found:

1) Cruddas's remarks on the PLP actions in the Chamber close to my feeling;

2) Brown utterly devoid of respect in the manner he chose to answer (or not)Cameron's questions. I don't think Cameron was putting it on, given Haringey's record.

This is all a good reason not to think that Brown is a changed man as some have claimed recently.

Lady Finchley said...

Ross 1:55 - you really are a piece of work. It is not about the money - it is about the ideology that allows a baby that has obviously been injured stay with that sorry excuse for a mother in the first place, for allowing the poor child to live in a house littered with feces and stinking of urine and a piece of crap 'partner' and 'boarder' who had a criminal record. Oh and then move them to a nicer flat and give the scumbag mother a childminder for four days a week - not so that she could work but so that she be in chatrooms all day. Oh yeah, government interference really worked, didn't it.

Bill Quango MP said...

David Boothroyd
Normally I choose to just ignore your partisan remarks while grudgingly admiring your courage in airing them here.

today just shows why you will lose. because your disreputable party does not know right from wrong, cannot conceive of admitting a fault, has a robot for a leader and has "if it never comes out then it never happened" as an election slogan.

People are rightly sick of the whole pack of you. Cameron just put 2% on the polls for himself, and your android leader repeatedly fed him the lines because he didn't have a page in his "best placed tractor" notes that said
WE ARE SORRY.

And to those bashing Dave on not going for the economy..it will be even more shit next week and the week after.. good to see him genuinely angry with Brown.
go to 4.20 on that youtube vid and watch.
The Replicant just looks bemused.
Good.

David Boothroyd said...

If there is anyone who has not yet realised how David Cameron was making this a party political point, read today's Evening Standard and the high profile article which he has been allowed to write for them. It's a co-ordinated party political push which Cameron has led.

(I know the commenters here are mostly Tories because I have read their other comments and they are Tories.)

Meanwhile if you want to know what Haringey actually did, rather than the David Cameron party political version, read the summary of the inquiry here.

Cassilis said...

By common understanding the charge 'making something a party political issue' usually refers to the exploitation of a tragic and / or random event to then exaggerate relatively minor party differences and score points.

By that reading the charge that Cameron politicised this is clearly nonsense and, as others have pointed out, Blair would've understood this and responded accordingly - you're wrong on this David.

John Pickworth said...

In my earlier comment I allowed the possibility that Cameron 'may' have been playing it up a bit. Although I did say I personally thought he was being genuine.

Having rewatched the video, its quite obvious he was highly annoyed with the Prime Minister. Indeed at one point he swept his papers onto the floor such was his frustration at the blithering idiot across the aisle.

Oh and David B, if you listen from the beginning of the video you'll hear Cameron state very clearly that he'll 'get onto the economy in a minute'... surely his intention at the time and probably with the expectation Brown would have answered his earlier question by then.

As it was, Brown never did answer the question even after he forced Cameron to exhaust all his attempts to get one.

What Brown did today was cynical politicking of the very worst kind. He had no intention of answering the question and sought only to protect his own (and his party's) ass at the expense of a dead child.

If the man had the tiniest shread of decency he'd resign right now. Today.

Cigfran said...

I work with child protection teams.The are ,in the main,overworked,stressed out,underpaid,innexperienced idealists.
Once the ranting and frothing of the usual right wing nutters (some of which are included above)subsides,will the Conservatives actually address the underlying problem of insufficient resources and proper pay for what is one of the hardest jobs in the public sector.Is it not Tory policy to freeze council tax?how does this fit in with properly resourced child protection?
For the avoidance of doubt,I've never voted Labour in my life,and feel all three main parties are useless

Newmania said...

Ross
The Guardian today also contains two articles which expose Brown`s borrow and bribe strategy as a lie. There is an interesting anti Brown coalition developing

Boothroyd , care to defend the use of the Bulger case over a long period or unfunded tax cuts to eb paid back after the election.

Lola said...

David Boothroyd. Of course all this is political. It's the job of politicians to push for matters like baby P to be resolved. The priviledge of the House of Commons allows these questions to be thoroughly explored on our behalf. It is the job of the opposition to hold the government to account on our behalf and to ask difficult questions. Especially as this government was elected by so few people, a minority of voters. But, Cameron gave Brown an opportunity to deal with the matter professionally and he, Browm, completely failed to do so.

It is also political because this sort of bureaucratic failure is symptomatic of the whole New Labour project which is based on presentation and not delivery. Brown is therefore total politics and he has been hung by his own narrowness, deceitfulness and self delusion.

Different Duncan said...

Brown deservedly comes out looking bad from this, in fact I'd go further and say the Parliamentary Labour Party's jeering was completely despicable.

However I can't say that Cameron is faultless here either. As part of his question, he said, "I don't expect an answer, you never get one". Cameron was also trying to score political points off the back of his tragic case. This was before Brown made his odious 'party political' point.

A plague on both their houses. The current two party leaders are both a disservice to politics: a PM who is entirely motivated by political positioning rather than what is good for the country, and an opposition leader who is entirely focussed on presentation and sees policy as an inconvenience.

Obnoxio The Clown said...

Gorgon Brownshirt is a snivelling little turd and a disgrace to his office. I'm not alone in feeling that way.

Arkangel said...

David Boothroyd.
Why don't you just bugger off and stop trying to defend the indefensible?

MikeyP said...

More please, Mr Cameron. Keep kicking that despicable oaf opposite you in the goolies a few more times, and I might even consider voting Tory again.

Pete said...

Without doubt Brown let himself down today and David Cameron was rightly outraged.

Another person who showed his true colours AND made the issue party-political was Nick Robinson who, much to Andrew Neil's chagrin, proved himself well fitted to be political editor of the 'unbiased' BBC.

On the other hand John Cruddas came accross as very fair-minded

Lola said...

Cigfran posted "The(y) are ,in the main,overworked,stressed out,underpaid,innexperienced idealists." If that is true it might explain a lot.

You might mean that they are engaged in a difficult job for low pay and as they are dealing with some of the most 'challenging' members of society and I would guess some grisly situations they can get upset. Well, yes. What you may need therefore is less inexperience and idealism and a bit more common sense. As regards pay they are being paid twice what they get because if they are in the pension scheme (which is after all deferred pay) they will be getting hidden benefits of between 30% and 50% of wages (depending on how you calculate it).

Better pay and conditions would come if the whole thing was localised and not centrally funded, and was held to account by local politicians, not Gordon and his merry band.

Lady Finchley said...

Cigran

Plenty of people - in fact, most, are in stressful, underpaid jobs. Big deal. The key word is 'idealist' - when a good old dose of pragmatism and scepticism is required. There are children we are talking about - this is not about ideology. You do not leave children with dangerous scum. End of. Stop making excuses.

an ordinary voter said...

Labour trolls are out in force trying to defend the indefensible.

Brown and Labour were shown for what they are and the more people that come to realise it the better,

Brown has taken a collosal hit on this and we haven't even seen tomorrows papers yet.

And whatever you think about Brown's behaviour or lack of empathy just think how Blair would have skillfully defused the issue in one well crafted remark and how he would have gracefully withdrawn the remark but still left it's sting on the leader of the opposition. Brown has done neither and damaged his own reputation into the bargain.

Travis Bickle said...

So there we have it, the ultimate socialist goal, anyone asking a question, however valid, it is being political and should be vilified.

How they must long for the days when such disgaceful, and disrepectful, behaviour towards the all powerful state is rewarded with 42 day detention without trial.

Disgracefully the BBC is towing their master's line, and have even edited out the sections of PMQs that show Brown in the worst light. And we pay for this propaganda.

Anonymous said...

What a shabby, squalid little non-entity Brown is. Bring on the election and see how many people will go into that booth and put and X next the name of this vile specimen.

Brown is electoral poison

norman said...

cigfran said:

So we are nutters hereand should 'understand' that if similar abuse occurs twice in the same borough, which arguably collects one of the highest council taxes in the country and is overmanned like the Red Army what it was then and accept that it is an unfortunate incident and no one is at fault. We the 'right wing nutters' also should argue that the poor borough needs more money and hence £5000 per year council tax is fair for the lowest branded property,
to bump up its already overmanned staffing by 500%? If all this is done could we expect low crime rate in that borough, good schools (it has the worst set of sink schools) and best delivery of social services there? Or will it go the same way as NHS which after swallowing Brown billions is letting the Great Ormond Street Hospital beg £3 through TV adverts?

Finally, if I understand , we should become a one party state with no right wing nutters like us and elect president Mugabe Brown unopposed possibly for life?

Half The Story said...

Boothroyding, a noun to describe a one man troll defence on a website.

When else is anyone able to ask the PM about anything if not at PMQs? Brown should have said...

"We will wait for the report and its conclusions, but I have asked them to look at the widest possible outcomes inclduing using the education sector model which takes over falling institutions where a need has been identified".

Simple.

Having someone who plainly is DNAed without a moral compass just with self importance and progression creates that type of answer.

p smith said...

Watch the footage. Cameron started off by adopting a patently political and aggressive tone and he said that he did not expect to get an answer from Brown BEFORE Brown accused him of playing party politics. It was abundantly clear that Cameron was seeking to harness the genuine revulsion and anger felt by us all and transpose some of that on to Brown rather than asking genuine questions that he had in a professional manner.

I don't expect Tory fanboys to see past their own partisan noses on this any more than McCain supporters were able to see the true nature of their candidate's campaign.

I thought PMQs today demonstrated parliament at its very worst and I am afraid that it was Cameron who took it into the gutter and acted like a petulant schoolboy when he was rightly called on it.

Let's see how the public reacts to this shall we.

Anonymous said...

"I work with child protection teams.The are ,in the main,overworked,stressed out,underpaid,innexperienced idealists".

£24 an hour is now defined as underpaid?

As for "innexperienced ( sic ) idealists", are you also suggesting that these individuals are not professionally trained or have full management back up and support?

The department in Haringey responsible for this debacle has an annual budget of £100,000,000 and still they are utterly useless. That said, if they employ barely literate people such as you, it would explain an awful lot.

"For the avoidance of doubt,I've never voted Labour in my life"

Sure you dont, oddly you also refer to "right wing nutters" presumably from a left wing perspective.

You really are idiotic, this is NOT about left, right politics, however I am sure, like Brown, you can only see issues as party political.

What a shameless oaf.

Newmania said...

By common understanding the charge 'making something a party political issue' usually refers to the exploitation of a tragic and / or random event to then exaggerate relatively minor party differences and score points.


Yes Bulger for example which to this day remains the most disgraceful and cynical campaign theme I can recall.I have no doubt that the memory has so shrivelled Boothroyd with shame that he cannot continue with his feeble parroting of the Party line

CROWN said...

This exchange just highlights why Gordon is such a political dead weight. I'll grant you that he has been able to blag his way as an economic minister, but he cannot blag his way as a leader.

He fails at every turn.

dalesman said...

Anonymous @ 1.03.
"These sorts of cases are highly complex and emotive. What could Cameron possibly hope to achieve by raising it in the bear pit of PMQ's?"

This little child was seen twice a week over a period of months. The Director of Childrens Services has already stated that social workers were too ready to believe the mother, and also stated that "some policies worked well". Three people have been issued written warnings.

I think what David Cameron was hoping to achieve was an answer to his question. How can it be right that this woman is allowed to investigate her own staff? It wouldn't happen anywhere else.

He was quite right to ditch his economics questions and go after Brown. The man just doesn't know how to answer a question.

Gordon Brown should be ashamed of himself after todays performance, but I bet he isn't.

DiscoveredJoys said...

I've watched the video and read the executive summary.

I think Cameron asked a pointed question - with probably no expectation of an answer. I think he would have been better off asking in the subsequent questions that the Prime Minister include questions about the appropriateness of the Director investigating their own within the national enquiry.

Having said that the Brown jibe about party politics was well out of order (whether it was true or not). He need only have said that the Government would respond after reading the report - but instead he was fixed on the line that the Government was already doing all that was necessary. Which he repeated. And repeated.

In terms of effectiveness I score Cameron as a 5, Brown 1. In terms of humanity, Cameron 8, Brown 0.

Anonymous said...

Party Politics?

Is this the same Labour Party who trotted out a Dunblane mother at their party conference in 1996 to get some cheap headlines.

i.e. New Labour is the party against children been murdered by gun toting killers - unlike the dastardly Conservatives who are in favour of child massacres...

I recall that a journalist (William Ress-Mogg?) referred to New Labour as "shroud wavers".

Anonymous said...

Are you part of the pre-planning for CCO campaigns like this Iain, with your "outrage" blog entry prepared in advance?

Anonymous said...

Despite the lathering on here about "labour nutters" "infiltrating" Dale's Diaries, the fact is that ID is systematically blocking numerous anon comments he simply disagrees with. There is no genuine debate here and this blog should be seen for what it is - part of a carefully staged and preplanned campaign by the Conservative Party.

Anonymous said...

Shamik said...

Glenrothes may have given him some breathing space, but fingers crossed, he'll be booted out of office sooner rather than later.

November 12, 2008 1:56 PM

When the sterling crisis emerges (let's say by next week), interest rates are raised massively to defend it (the week after) and the gilt rate dissappears into the stratosphere meaning Brown can't borrow any more (give that until the New Year), no one but no one other than this sinister, brooding, nasty piece of work can take the blame.

He is and has always been a complete and utter disaster. UK plc and all it's people will also face disaster.

See Iceland for the results.

Iain Dale said...

4.16 - yeah, right. Because if what you are saying is true, I;d have hardly allowed your comment through, would I? Of course it could be a double bluff.

I do delete anonymous comments, as explained ad nauseum previously, if they are gratuitously insulting or obvious trolls. Anonymous comments have no rights whatsoever.

Lady Finchley said...

Boothroyd

I read DC's brilliant piece in the Standard. You really aren't very bright are you?

North Briton Hunter said...

It was a wholly unedifying exchange but Cameron was definitely resorting to party politics.

Cameron asked questions and Brown, for once, actually did answer them to the extent that he could. An independent inquiry has been launched and Haringey is going to be examined. What more could he say.

Brown 3

Cameron 3

Clegg - who?

FFScotland said...

Brown - nil; Cameron - nil. Both men scored political points over the murder of a baby.

Anonymous said...

I notice that nobody attacking Brown and defending Cameron has yet to find an answer to my charge that Cameron would not have done this if it had been a Tory controlled council.

Seems to prove the point it was party political motivated I think!

Cigfran said...

Nonny @ 3.31
Sorry about the typo,it's the result of Labour's education policy

The front line child protection workers tend to be young and Idealistic because once they approach 35 the risks to health and their own family finances of being front line mean they bugger off to better paid and less confrontational posts.Child protection managers are then scrambling for staff ending up with newly qualifies idealists .

What makes this awful case worse,is that none of the main parties have any idea of how to prevent it happening again.

You articulate my point about right wing nutters better than anything I could say.

What would the tories do to prevent it happening again?
What's the point of knee jerk sackings?

Wonder if the newly redundant spivs form the city fancy retraining?

dalesman said...

Strange how David Boothroyd has also popped up on the Daily Telegraphs blogs, commenting on the same subject.

Lady Finchley said...

North Briton is obviously living in a different warped universe.

The report that DC was referring to was the one done by the Head of Children's Services. And why another independent inquiry? I thought after the Climbie inquiry 'lessons were learnt'. Obviously not.

Oh, I know the lesson - get rid of all the incomptetent idealist mealy mouthed social workers and their bosses who fund childminders for low life scum who abuse their children and don't even have enough nous to figure that 'chocolate'meant to look like like dirt used to cover the bruises was a ruse of the basest kind. And even if it was dirt what does that say about the caregivers that the boy was so filthy. Crawl back into your hole sweetheart.

strapworld said...

Word of advice for David Boothroyd.

Stop dancing on the grave of a young child. You are mocking the dead by your outrageous comments.

If you cannot understand real anger against Harringey Social Services and Ms Shoestring in particular and the real need for people to be sacked, then you are dimmer than a Toc H Lamp.

John Pickworth said...

"Cameron asked questions and Brown, for once, actually did answer them... "

You must have bats hearing because nobody else heard anything except some waffly random stuff?

Its usual practise - go on, call me old fashioned - for the answer to actually have some relationship or bearing on the question. More so when the question is asked directly. Brown wouldn't even pledge himself to a token measure when offered an honourable escape by Cameron. Courage? My arse!

Brown's new mantra "An end to Tory questions and answers. Never again will Labour return to the dark days of public accountability or honourable resignations from our pensions... ermm I mean jobs".

Lady Finchley said...

Cigfran

I have a 19 year old son who has more sense than these social workers. Stop making excuses.

This is not about national policy inasmuch as Children's Services are part of the borough or county council. Haringey and all the other Labour run councils are notorious for this kind of thing. What is the national issue is that society has come to this - this is a broken society where D list reality shows, venality, refusal to work or take responsibility, binge drinking, puking in the street, having seven children by six different fathers is considered A-ok. Apparently Baby P's mother was also the product of a drug adddict mother and alcoholic father but she was given every kind of assistance to help overcome it. No more excuses!!!

Anonymous said...

David Boothroyd is a tit.

Don't worry about a child dying and "no single person to blame" again, worry about Parliamentary abuse by saying "you" instead of "he". What a twat.

In the private sector people are being laid off not because they are bad at their jobs but because the economy is in a bad state, but once again in the public sector, people let a child die after having seen it 60 times, and no-one gets the sack.

Boothroyd, you are a tit

FFScotland said...

People complain about Brown, in this case, not answering questions at PMQ's.

MP's don't ask questions at PMQ's, nor does the Prime Minister answer them because the whole purpose of PMQ's is to score points off your opponents.

So when the story of a murdered baby gets tossed into the bear pit, you end up with the toxic mess you saw today.

If people wonder why politicians are held in such low regard, you can see the reason right there.

Justin W said...

"Brown, who is a statesman "

What planet are you on Mr Boothroyd?!

Statesman and Brown do not go together.

Anonymous said...

Let's get one hting straight here.

There will again, in future, be a similar occurence - a baby or young child will be found dead at the hands of parents or minders. You might not like it but it will.

So, when it does happen, in a real democracy, the powers that be have a fidiciary duty (or should have) to find out exactly what went wrong, who cocked up and how can you TRY to ensure it doesn't happen again under similar circumstances.

If no one can be singled out, the head of that particular service should take the can and fall on their sword.

Trying to sweep it under the carpet is akin to child abuse. It's what Brown is trying desparately to do.

He's a bloody disgrace.

JuliaM said...

Boothroyd:"(I know the commenters here are mostly Tories because I have read their other comments and they are Tories.)"

Translation: 'Oh, shit, I stepped on my dick again, didn't I? Well, you are because I say you are, so there!'

Master of debate, you are not...

/golfclap

King Athelstan said...

The Liebour apologists here,must think We all have very short memories. I can remember when the boot was on the other foot. As for The Colour Brown He has stooped far lower than anyone in history. He is no longer fit to be considered as a normal human being. Its open season.

Paul Pinfield said...

This was by far Brooon's worst performance. Nasty, scheming and arrogant.

Too much to hope for an election....

norman said...

P.Smith

"I don't expect Tory fanboys to see past their own partisan noses on this any more than McCain supporters were able to see the true nature of their candidate's campaign"

I worked in Scotland in 1980s when Brown was an MP there after working for a few years as a lecturer of sociology in a Glasgow college. His colleagues, who were all die-hard Labour supporters said to me once that Brown is so much a Labour Party Appratchik, they never heard him to praise any other party leader, that he chose
the topic of Labour Party in Scotland for his PhD thesis and was not critical about anything it did which one needs for a research work.

Brown is partisan to his finger tips, and he wants us to believe that he is a 'conviction politician' while in reality he is deluded.

Tony Blair said...

... it would never have happened in my day.

I enjoyed the skilful way Cameron managed to use a young child's murder as a political football and then put on a bravura display of synthetic anger when accused of doing just that. Maybe 'heir to Blair' wasn't so far off the mark after all..

Anonymous said...

Come off it, Tory apologists. Both men played politics with this one. I am as nauseated by Cameron's faux anger as I am by Brown's clunking crassness. Politics is debased once again. But don't give me this rubbish that Cameron was blameless and honourable in the whole shoddy exchange.

Lola said...

Re the 'Tory' epithet used as a form of abuse by lefties posting here. It's very interesting how tribal you are. I - as a righty, not a Tory - do not use 'Labour' in a perjorative way. Persoanlly I consider 'Labour' as a valid descripter of a valid philosophy. Fatally flawed, mind you, but valid. I do have a go at 'Socialists', because they are Wrong (history has proved it time after time, as has one G Brown) but I do not use it as an insult. Now, 'New Labour' is a different matter. I find myself spitting out that name with real bile because it encapsulates all that has become wrong with UK politics and politicians. It is a 'brand'. It is a name for politics by presentation rather than policy.

But your use of 'Tory' in the same vein tells me all about your inability to move on. You are stuck in a classist past. Wallowing a non-existant and long dead class war. The world has moved on and passed you by. It is not class that is today's issue it is Big Government, Big Bureaucracy, Big Business - the three weird sisters that seek to enslave us. And New Labour ticks the boxes on two out of three and has spent the last 11 years cosying up to the third to get money. It is New Labour who have betrayed the class war and who are now the 'Tory's' you so despise.

Your saviour (if you are a working man) may just lie in the electoral success of a Conservative goverment. Think about it. The Tory's are now the workers friend -NOT New Labour.

Anonymous said...

"PMQs: Shame on Gordon Brown"
Cameron and his henchmen missed another golden opportunity to nail Brown and New Labour with questions about the shocking state of the economy caused mainly by New Labour policies.

North Briton Hunter said...

Lady Finchley, you are a deluded fool.



'Haringey and all the other Labour run councils are notorious for this kind of thing.'

No attempt at cheap political point scoring at all.

You like to blame a 'broken society' but this is, no matter what anybody says, a horrible, shocking rarity.

I pity your sad, pathetic view of the world, comfortable in an ivory tower that society was better in your day and now it's gone to the dogs.

Rather than dealing with this terrible case - and I couldn't agree more that the reaction of Haringey social services has been terrible - you choose to attack all parts of society which fail to fit in your limited world view.

People in your position don't want to pay taxes to provide services, you think charity can solve such problems, which it palpably can't, and then complain when things go wrong.

The truth is that you don't want to take any social responsibility at all. Society's ills are all everyone else's fault.

noah's ark said...

With the mock-outrage of your post, you are hardly showering yourself in glory on this one, Iain. Brown and Cameron are as bad as each other but I expect more from you. This is Guido-esque in its crudity.

Lord Snooty said...

This is pompous and sanctimonious. Yeah, Dave's the only one who cares about this, Brown's heartless... blah blah blah. What a load of rubbish. You are a very cynical man, Iain Dale. Either that or utterly naive.

I don't expect anyone except you will read this as you will no doubt delete it. Bottler.

scallywag said...

Snottie McTwat is a national disgrace. I live in France and even my French friends ask me how the hell this cretin got the top job in the UK.

I have no answer...

Vienna Woods said...

Ahem! According to BBC News (on-line)this evening ...

The prime minister later told Mr Cameron: "I do regret making a party political issue of this."

Now, if this is true then this is a first admission of failure which, if true.....could mean Brown has been strongly advised by he who should not be named, to cough it before he is pilloried by the press.

JPT said...

Brown is dead in the water.

Someone should pull the corspe ashore.

Jess The Dog said...

Don't lay into Brown too much over this or it will become a party political issue. Let his comment be judged in isolation.

Lady Finchley said...

And you, North Briton Hunter, are an asshole. If you think that what I have described passes for decent society than you are a bigger one. And no, I don't want my taxes to pay for a child minder for a low down scumbag who'd allow her child to be tortured so she could have a full time c**k and piss about in chat rooms instead of working and caring for her child.

You're a typical class warrior - you think throwing money at problems solves them and then criticise hard working people who resent their taxes being pissed away on low lives. Haringey has one of the highest council taxes yet the worst schools and the worst social services. What does that tell you, Wolfie?

You think what happened to that child is a rarity? It's the tip of the iceberg. And the ones that aren't killed are neglected and abused. Charming story about Shannon Matthew's mother who kept her drugged so that she could pretend she was kidnapped and claim the £50,000 reward money. You bet your ass she doesn't fit into my view of society.

And if your head wasn't up your own ass you would know that a good many charities also receive government funding i.e. our taxes. So you're right, I don't want my taxes to go to inept councils but I sure as hell don't mind my taxes going to Kids Company where I know Camilla Batmangelidh is going to really look after those abused and neglected kids.

Crawl back under your rock, Wolfie - your time is past just like that sorry joke of a Prime Minister that you revere.

Ben said...

Nick Robinson is on the receiving end of scores of complaints for his partisan and cynical commenting on today's PMQs. (He said that Cameron 'couldn't believe his luck').

I agree with others that John Cruddas showed much greater humanity and honesty than the leader of the Labour Party today.

John in Security said...

Lord Snooty said...

We are looking for you since you escaped from the high security institution that you were to spend the rest of your life. You see, you think you are clever by assuming a name like Lord Snooty, but we know you are there. This time it will be American Straight Jacket. Come or we will look for you. No more exercise time. It is 24 hours in your dark room.

John in Security

the tide is turning said...

I have been so shocked and horrified that I have been hardly able to read full reports on this case, feeling physically sick. I imagine that many others might feel the same and I believe that Cameron was right to bring this up at PMQs.

That an innocent child should be abused and killed in such a way, when under the observation of Haringey social services which was also responsible for the Climbie child, needs a full investigation. And an independent investigation at that level.

Cameron was right to question on the independence issue as the lack of makes a mockery and devalues the review. If Labour cannot see the error of their ways on this, then I hope the Tories will change the format as soon as they get in. I feel Cameron was also right to point out that failing schools are taken over but failing social services depts aren't. A second case such as this says that urgent fixing is required, that the weaknesses existing at the time of Victoria Climbie's death still exist.

Brown's inability or disinclination to answer a direct question was disgraceful. For the seriousness of this matter, I don't believe Cameron raised it as a party political issue and Brown was hoping to detract and devalue his opposite by suggesting so. Again, disgraceful.

Change is needed on many fronts in this country, otherwise we are going to hell on a handcart.

Anonymous said...

Nick Robinson comments on this on his blog were annoying. It seemed to be written very much from the point of view of Brown. Or at least a left of centre position.

What especially annoyed me was the claim that King's views on fiscal policy to boost the economy undermine Tory policy. Why exactly? King - together with Brown - stood at the pinnacle of the establishment that unleashed the loose monetary policy that ignited the boom that has now burst and is causing us to fall headlong into recession. Given that they have both ballsed up once already - big time - why should we necessarily trust them to get things right this time? It seems odd to me that two individual can so damage an economy and the lives of the millions in it and yet seem to get off scot free in the view of the political commentators i have to pay the wages of.

Beyond that Robinson reduces economic policy to a majority vote: most people right and left favour massive reinflation therefore thats it - such a policy cannot be questioned. I would suggest that such an argument is bollocks. If he wants the name of people who question the policies being folowed by Brown/King and Paulson/Bernanke then I'll list a few:

Ron Paul (Republican Senator)
Peter D Schiff (Investment Analyst)
Gene Callaghan (Economist)
Frank Shostak (Economist)
Robert Murphy (Economist)
George Reiseman (Economist)
Roger Garrison (Economist)
Peter Boetke (Economist)
Mark Thornton (Economist)
Sean Corrigan (Economist)
Walter L Block (Economist)


There a few dead ones aswell - Hayek, Mises, Rothbard, Hazlitt, Sennholz (and before you say it I dont see how being dead can disqualify anyione as the likes of Brown (and no doubt Robbo) are perfectly happy to cite Keynes in their support).

Robinson would no doubt say he has not heard of them but then thats more revealing of his ignorance of a subject he professes to know so much about.

An economic theory is not rendered true or useful simply because a lot of people support it. Rather, its usefulness depends on its sucess in accurately describing the world around us and framing polices that will benefit that world. Robinson's comments suggest he has no understanding of this. Ofcourse he probably does but the fact that he chooses to rely on cheap political points like "Oh well no one agrees with you Cameron therefore your are wrong" simply suggests politcal bias or laziness on his (Robinson's) part.

To help justify his view of the PMQ confrontation Robbinson says that Kennedy and Cruddas agreed with him. So what? They are hardly impartial observers of the current politcal scene.

I dont know if Cameron was relieved to avoid talking about the economy. For the reasons I state above I dont see that he had a reason to be so concerned. Looking at the session it just seemed to me that Brown annoyed Cameron and so the latter shose to concentrate on getting Brown to apologise. And it wasn't a trivial issue: being painted as making political capital out of a child's death could have a devastating impact on Cameron's politcal standing with the electorate so Brown could hardly expect cameron to just let the comment go. The questions Cameron raised were ones of natural justice - not being a judge in one's own trial (for want of a better word). They seemed entirely pertinent to me. And they were not, in essence, party political. What made them so was Brown's behaviour, esp his refusal to give a straight answer.

Richard Dale said...

David Boothroyd

You've thrown away your own case.

If just bringing up a point in PMQs makes it a party-political point (which I disagree, but you asserted without feeling the need to justify your assertion) then Brown cannot complain that Cameron makes a party-political point. In your eyes it is not Cameron's question, but the event that makes it a party-political point. cameron cannot help that.

If you complain something is used as a party-political point, yet state that PMQs makes every question party-political, then you are saying that the issue should never be brought up in PMQs. That is absurd.

You have tied yourself up in a knot.

Dangermouse said...

Brown is a stain on the honour of the nation. Bring on the ballot box.

Annabel HV(retired) said...

I agree with every word Cameron said today.
Also, social workers do tend to be young and idealistic. Very easy to hoodwink too much of the time.
The big problem is that all us hardnosed old Health Visitors and social workers have retired. We could spot a lie from the doorstep. The NSPCC inspector used to be just that. Often an ex cop. Funnily enough, the families had a lot of respect for us lot. No one likes a child abuser actually, and the really criminal parents who formed and still do, a tiny, tiny minority of the population were dealt with more effectively, and lives were saved.
Perhaps they need to get back some of that professional scepticism. Perhaps they need a few lectures on forensic psychology so they would not be hoodwinked quite so easily. These sociopathic parents are very clever people. We should never forget that simple fact. They might not be able to read or write, but they make up for it with animal cunning. The modern social worker is no match for them. Its a damn good job they are so few are far between.

the tide is turning said...

And I have just read that the three are facing up to 14 years in jail for "causing or allowing" the death of the child.
This was murder.

It has been reported in The Times that the mother has shown no remorse and told friends that she will "be out by Christmas". The article also notes that Haringey was not forthcoming with all documents until the court case, thus hampering the police investigation.

Utterly shameful.

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/uk/crime/article5141019.ece

Anonymous said...

Haringey is a Labour authority, so inevitably the question will arise - I think if one tries to picture Cameron getting into such a fine old lather over a Tory Authority, it's easier to see the point. It of course wouldn't happen.

Another interesting thing to note is the almost total absence of comment on the Jersey scandal from any of our politicians. Here we appear to have cover-ups, political interference in police work and other dreadful suspicions. Yet narry a word from British Conservative shores. Could this be anything to do with the locations of various let-us-call-them "bankers" and their "offshore" accounts held for various persons unknown and a desire not to "rock the boat" in that territory. To quote Gandalf in Lord of the Rings - "keep it secret, keep it safe".

Anonymous said...

The BBC News coverage of this was a disgrace. Gordon Brown makes a totally offensive comment which tells us more about our PM than 100 conference speeches could, and what does the BBC report say? Cameron got the m other's age wrong and MPs on both sides were a bit rowdy.

It is time to declare the BBC public enemy number 1. A constant thorn in the side of the Tory cause, the BBC has to go. If it carries on as a private network then so be it, but the time has come to stop spending public money on this Labour propaganda machine.

david said...

anonyarse 8.17am

cameron made no mention that it was a labour council until after he was accused of making party political points by gorgon.

take it for what it is. a child died in horrific circumstances when the authorities should have spotted it, not once but twice and by the same authority.

and who's to say he wouldn't react in the same way if it was a tory one. it is you idiots who have no decency and who do not want to root out such ineffective systems that let children die in such circumstances.

David Boothroyd said...

Richard Dale, I take it you did not see my comment on Daniel Hannan's latest blog entry at the Daily Telegraph.

I for one do not think it is wrong to bring issues of child protection into the field of party politics. On the contrary, it's practically essential. What is wrong is, as David Cameron did, to make a party political point and then react petulantly when what you have done is pointed out.

The local constituency member could raise the issue at PMQs in a non-party way (although I'm not sure whether the local MP was Lynne Featherstone or David Lammy).

There have been child abuse scandals in Conservative authorities during David Cameron's leadership which have not produced the same demands from him.

No-one seems to have considered whether this case would have turned out differently in another authority; it is quite likely, in fact almost certain, that it would have turned out the exact same way, which makes most of the points being made about Haringey meaningless. Or to put it another way, it's merely a coincidence that this was the same authority partly involved in Victoria ClimbiƩ.

Lady Finchley said...

Anon 8:17

Get real - Haringey has form - remember poor little Victoria Climbie. And unfortunately this kind of thing is prevalent in Labour councils. Have a look at the You Tube from yesterday's PMQs and then tell me DC was faking.

As for the Jersey scandal - why would Conservatives comment - Jersey has its own government and jurisdiction.

Begone, troll!

Lady Finchley said...

Go on deluded David, tell me which abuse scandals in Conservative councils there were and if they were the magnitude of this one.

You are the one getting political over this - NOT David Cameron.

Paul Burgin said...

I did hesitate and think a bit before posting my views on this, which I have put in a blog entry

http://paulburgin.blogspot.com/2008/11/that-commons-clash-over-baby-p.html

norman said...

David B:

Remember a far leftie called Margaret Hodge in 1970s and 80s in Islington? The scandal occurred in her time in a children home? She reinvented herself as New Labour along with one hardcore CND member called Tony Blair? What better illustration you need than the islington childen scandal under M Hodge who was appointed as children minister by another Islington resident Blair!

What should Cameron asked yesterday? Can I say :
1. He should have asked while Brown (you PM) is boasting Britain is best placed to ride out the tonrnado coming from USA ( which is stuff and nonsense), the Dollar is going stronger and Pound is weaker becoming monopoly money. Why with all Wall Street fiasco, Fanny, Freddie, Lehman and Morgan Stanley's problem, Dollar is getting stronger and stronger and pound through the floor?

2. Why Euro is stronger than Pound?
You, the PM was going up and down Europe preaching them your solution and accusing them of ignorance in economics ( it is a shame as You PM was a sociologist , wrote thesis on Scottish Labour Party History) the Euro is stronger than Pound. Why?

Then Cameron should answer. I tell you that out in the world no one believes that Britain is able to ride out the storm and no one believes that you are an economic wizard, a world fixer of economic problem ( what a delusion!) who cannot fix his own country's mess which he created in the first place.

Happy David B now? We are talking about economy!

David Boothroyd said...

Well, 'Lady Finchley', I was thinking of Samuel Duncan and Kimberley Harte. Their victim survived but that was only because of good fortune. In some respects their conduct was worse than in Baby P.

Lady Finchley said...

An almost equally dreadful story but it was not front page news -so not likely to be on DC's radar - and (fortunately) the poor child didn't die as a result of her disgraceful treatment.

I can though, see from the drawing that the so-called parents are clearly part of our ever-expanding underclass, like the unlovely Karen Matthews and undoubtedly like the filth that killed Baby P. Have you read the Times today - apparently Baby P's mother has three other children including one born to her in prison. They obviously didn't live with her so surely your beloved Haringey council should have been on red alert.

Admit you are wrong Boothroyd but of course you can't, just like your dysfunctional leader.

North Briton Hunter said...

Nothign I enjoy more than seeing a deluded, selfish, mad Tory blast blige and bullshit with such inerring inaccuracy.

Just remember Lady Finchley, it's your party that created the underclass in the first place.

Lady Finchley said...

No, you're the deluded one, North Briton Hunter. The underclass was created when the feckless were rewarded by benefits, when self control and self discipline flew out the window, nobody took responsibility and when morons were told they were ENTITLED because it was their 'yuman rite'. For the past 30 years we been sinking into a state of anomie - where moral constraints are no longer sufficient to restrain individual desires. It has become a free for all - nurtured by the nanny state and puke making liberals like you. The social contract has been broken - not by Margaret Thatcher (who before you say it, NEVER said 'there is no such thing as society', but by bleating, bleeding heart liberals who think that everyone (except for hardworking people) have the right to do what they want when they want. It behooves the nanny state to keep everyone in their place and oiks like Karen Matthews and her filthy ilk are created - white trash, pure and simple. So, I am afraid you and your kind will have to take credit for that, you stupid little man.

North Briton Hunter said...

Oh Lady Finchley, you are a sweet thing.

Oh course Margaret Thatcher said that.

'And, you know, there is no such thing as society. There are individual men and women, and there are families.'

They were her exact words to Woman's Own Magazine in October 1987.

And to be fair to her, which I am not always, there is much to recommend in the sentiment.

But it was her government which created the cult of the individual and eroded any sense of community and social responsibility.

It seems to me that you would prefer to return to a time of Victorian mores: where promiscuity and homosexuality are illegal and hidden; where abortion is carried out in the back street and not mentioned; and backbreaking poverty is kept to those slums into which the pathetic likes of you don't have to venture and don't need to realise exist.

Lady Finchley said...

Oh North Briton Hunter, you are a fool - ‘There is no such thing as society’. These were the words of Margaret Thatcher, cynically taken out of context by those who would wish to portray her as an evil icon, responsible for everything from Gordon Gekko greed to callous indifference to others’ misery. What she went on to say was ‘there is a living tapestry of men and women and people and the beauty of that tapestry and the quality of our lives will depend upon how much each of us is prepared to take responsibility for ourselves and each of us prepared to turn around and help by our own efforts those who are unfortunate.’ The words taken out of context resonated greatly in the mid 80’s, when crime, which had sharply risen since the late 70’s, was on everyone’s minds, yet at a loss as to where to attribute the cause. ‘Blaming society’ became the catchphrase
du jour and Thatcher sought to reply to this in an article for ‘Woman’s Own’, perhaps ill-advisedly since every politician knows that their words are bound to be taken out of context for sensationalist headlines.'

For you info, the above is an excerpt from an essay on criminology. It does show how ill-informed you are.

Of course nobody wants a return to the bad old days but to aver that the Karen Matthews of the world are a-ok is just pig ignorant. Typical liberal to blame Margaret Thatcher - it is just intellectual laziness. And even worse, you go on to assume that I have certain attitudes to homosexuality, sex and others less fortunate. You know nothing about me but you've lost the argument so you flail about flinging tired old insults. Ho-hum.

The tide has turned. People have woken up. We will no longer put up with people like Karen Matthews who CHOOSE to live like animals, for whom benefits are a life choice and who churn out children (the real victims) just to make more dosh. Most people I know have huge compassion for those who have had a raw deal in life and we do all we can to help but we are sick to the back teeth of the underclass who positively wallow in their own filth. And even sicker of people like you who actively condone it.

Anonymous said...

Iain Dale said...

"I do delete anonymous comments, as explained ad nauseum previously, if they are gratuitously insulting or obvious trolls. Anonymous comments have no rights whatsoever"

Whereas,

"he is rotten to the core", "almost as low as the scum who were supposed to be the guardians of Baby P", "vile digusting creature this Dictator of England", "utter scum", "bastard", "f**k Brown and f**k Labour!", "Fuhrer", "odious, nasty individual", "arse", incorrigible stupidity", "moral cripple", "odious ballbag...jock itch", and "snivelling little turd"

all come from the right sort of people and are perfectly okay.

That's very droll Iain. It's the way you tell em.

Anonymous said...

Some of you tories really ought to do something about poor lady finchley.

Recently she has become incaple of hiding what you are all like. Either have her put down or Section her. It's the humane thing to do. Plus it would be better for the tories to keep that sort of thing hidden - not that tories would ever look for party advantage.

Anonymous said...

I doubt whether anything will get through to David Boothroyd's invincibly silly mind but, for what it's worth, I am a LABOUR voter who was incredulous and outraged at Brown's response, just as I was by the Haringey official's refusal to offer some sign of regret. So bang go the asinine comments that all this criticism is only Tory-inspired (as if that would invalidate it anyway. It's not where it comes from but whether it's true that matters).

Brown, according to the Times today, wasn't briefed and had to have advice shouted to him from Balls via Smith to prop up his answer. Such is his repetitious speak-your-weight-machine way when answering a question that he couldn't think on his feet just to say what a tragedy this was and that all right-thinking people would agree with him and support a through, independent enquiry. Would that have been too difficult?

Anonymous said...

A perfectly vile passage from Cameron. What a reptile this man is. He knowingly raised a party political point (if it was not knowingly then the man's a fool). He then lied that his question was not political. This does not add lustre to his record. Whatever bluster you may think Cameron subsequently tried to cover up with, Brown's original answer was perfectly adequate. Cameron seems to have thought he could make more capital out of his question than he actually did and, far from stopping digging, made himself look even more hypocritical by repeating it. Cameron has chosen to constantly personalise his attacks on Brown. It is an undignified tactic which is now rebounding on him.