Is PMQ’s passed its sell-by-date?

For some time now Prime Minister’s Questions has brought itself into disrepute, notably by the unknowing asking the unknowing; especially where ‘matters EU’ and ‘Brexit’ are concerned.

It is also known that those Members of Parliament who manage to make the ‘questions list’ are often coerced by their Whips to ask ‘loaded’ questions in order that their leader may ‘big themselves up’ whilst making a joke or two about their opposite number, the Leader of the Opposition. Sometimes the Prime Minister of the day is presented with an ‘open goal’ by a Member of Parliament from the opposition who asks a question with the intention of causing mischief, only to find that the laugh is on his party and him.

Such a scenario came about today when  Clive Efford (Labour Eltham) asked the Prime Minister:

Mr Speaker, happy Christmas. Last year, the Prime Minister told the Radio Times that on Christmas day she likes to prepare and cook her own goose. In the spirit of Christmas, may I suggest that to extract the maximum pleasure from the messy job of stuffing her goose, she names it either Michael or Boris? [Interruption.]

Only to receive the following response:

I think I will be having to resist the temptation to call the goose Jeremy.

The exchange can be read here from Hansard and viewed here on parliament tv (from -7.50.03)

Prime Minister’s Questions has become almost a ‘freak show’, in that idiots are asking questions of another idiot and consequently receiving idiotic responses. As stated previously nothing illustrates this more graphically than questions about  ‘matters EU’ and/or ‘Brexit’.

A touch of ‘gentle humour’ in any situation can be quite ‘telling’ in making one’s point while also ‘belittling’ an opponent. Unfortunately, with all the serious/pressing ‘matters du jour’, is there a place for humour and ‘scoring cheap points’?

Politics- and Prime Minister’ Questions – has become nothing but ‘theatre’, dished up for unknowing viewers/bystanders and overseen by  a popinjay; ‘egged-on’ by the likes of Andrew Neil, Jo Coburn and Laura Kuenssberg on the Daily Politics and David Dimbleby on Question Time. – not forgetting those on Newsnight and Radio 4.

As an afterthought, one of the earliest animals to be domesticated for agricultural purposes, sheep are raised for fleece. In this regard we, the people, are treated in the same manner, as the political elite (politicians, the media and ‘experts’) ‘fleece’ us day in and day out.


4 thoughts on “Is PMQ’s passed its sell-by-date?

  1. PMQ’s, yes it’s rotten, it has no purpose, and it’s not just PMQ’s, I fail to see any worth in the Budget. ‘Question Time’ and the ‘Today’ programme are just more of the same, a pantomime.

  2. In its current form YES but it needs reforming into something that really does hold our PM to account every week.

      1. Well actually one does not follow the other.

        If one believes PMQ now serves NO useful purpose then one could either wish to see it abolished and not replaced or one could wish to see it reformed as I do.

        As to THA activity in 2018, without discovering a silver bullet, we will ‘soldier on’ with more of the same building an Internet presence, and grass root support with plans for a new workshop in the Spring, hosted by a professional facilitator, to see if we can attract new supporters who will have the time and inclination to be active.

        As a supporter of the cause what are your plans, apart from you continued sniping from the side lines? 😉

Comments are closed.