I defy anyone to say they didn't enjoy the Punch and Judy PMQs this morning with Hague & Prescott. I'm not sure I have ever bought the line that people want concensus to break out and for politicians to constantly agree with each other. Judging from the emails to the Daily Politics and to Simon Mayo that is far from the case. Prescott actually did really well and if I was scoring it I would just shade it to him. Although I think the person who enjoyed it most was Andrew Mitchell, who was sitting next to Hague. He spent the whole time almost wetting himself. And he wasn't alone. The whole thing was quite hilarious. And now we have to wait three weeks until His Tonyness and DC appear again. It'll be difficult. I think.
By the way, I am now back from the USA. Not that you're interested!
I think the point is that it almost wouldn't matter if Hague had got Prescott to admit to murder at the dispatch box: Hague's image as a very high quality comedic turn is now damaging his credibility as a politician - it's simply the accepted wisdom that he's very funny but you wouldn't want him anywhere near runnning the country.
As a Labour supporter I am clearly not disappointed, but it is strange to see. I don't quite think of Hague as simply good for a laugh, but it seems the rest of Britain does.
Nobody hates him anymore, but nobody can take him seriously.
No, I didn't hear it but as I commented before the event (so this by way of a bit of an "I told you so") over at Guido's shop, Prezza should not be misunderestimated on these occasions.
PMQs are ideally suited to his bulldozer style, which conversely is a complete liability when he is being interviewed by Paxo et al.
I think 'Punch' did quite well (when I could actually decipher what it was he was saying) and Judy is a much more natural and sharp humourist than Dave. He is genuinely "off the cuff" whereas Dave's jokes are always scripted to death.
David Heath for Lib Dem Deputy Leader I say. He was very effective too though not as comedic as Punch and Judy.
A politician who takes himself very seriously can be cut by incisive humour. Mr Prescott is a "street brawler" who can laugh at himself. He is almost invulnerable in a Parliamentary knock-about. It was never going to be a walk-over at PMQ. As Barbara Worth says, he is out of his depth when engaged in an interview situation.
I agree with you that politicians ought to disagree about something. Otherwise, apart from anything else, they disagree over nothing, as Tony & Gordon do. John clearly has things he believes in & I think William has to, & no longer aiming at the top job can say so.
I could make a another remark about PR allowing leaders to hold something other than the "centre ground" but won't (except for there of course).
Post a Comment