PMQ analysis: Cameron fires blanks
Cameron fires blanks
The Electoral Reform Society is a voluntary organisation that campaigns for a better democracy, particularly through changes to our electoral system.
|  |
The information commissioner is to be given stronger powers to regulate the Data Protection Act (DPA) following a proposal from justice secretary Jack Straw.
|  |
When a BNP membership list hit the web last week it blew the parties operations wide open. Sonya Gable, anti-fascist expert, explains what it says about the BNP's internal problems. |  |
Wednesday, 26, Nov 2008 06:31
It seemed for a while like David Cameron may have found a niche for himself in what was becoming an increasingly Labour-dominated debate. The Tory leader's decision to separate Conservative policy from Labour spending plans opened up political space and hinted at a fundamental drawing of the lines between the two main parties.
Those hints became somewhat firmer on Monday, when shadow chancellor George Osborne's response to the Pre-Budget Report, for all its rhetoric, revealed pivotal differences of approach to the economic crisis. On the one hand, we had Labour saying debt would have to rise as the government took whatever measures it thought necessary to help the country through the recession. On the other, the Conservatives stood for long-term economic prudence. Hard choices; a tougher few years, perhaps, as government spending was cut or maintained during the worst of times.
Labour has maintained its image – competent, experienced, committed to "helping people". But the Conservatives have not. David Cameron had another deflating half hour in the Commons today, managing to appear petulant and pointless as Brown confidently battered him about the face.
Cameron's attacks were blunt, badly aimed, and - pivotally – did not address the public's concerns. Would the prime minister confirm he planned to double the national debt? Cameron asked twice. Brown was mildly evasive – no more so than you would expect – but was quite able to say: "We've already published the figures." Which, of course, they have. On Monday. During the Pre-Budget Report. To desperately try to get him to say it, merely so it makes a nice sequence on the evening news, came across as opportunistic and feeble. The image Cameron needs to project to emphasise his economic policy is all about reliability, maturity and gravitas. Instead, the public was treated to political point scoring.
It's worth paying particular attention to one of Brown's replies.
"I'm sorry I have to give him an economic lecture every week. He cites debt levels across the world – this is what has to be done in a period when there's an economic downturn. The fact he even asks this question now means he wants to do absolutely nothing."
In three sentences, the prime minister managed to summarise his attack on Cameron. 'He knows nothing. I am experienced, I can tell you what is happening around the world, which happens to be similar to what is happening here. All this proves the Tories don't care about you.' And this on a day when the government should really have egg on its face for mistakenly publishing a VAT document on one of its websites.
Cameron's response, to cite his own economic policies, merely highlighted the problems he is facing. He mentioned three things. Loan guarantees for banks, the party's tax rewards for businesses who take on those on unemployment benefit, and cutting inefficiency in government. The first is pretty strong, the second was one of the most disappointing and over-hyped policy announcements of the year – so much so that gathered journalists compared it to Star Wars Episode One; the Jar Jar Binks of economics policy – and the third is the oldest call of opposition parties who have no real idea of the numbers they're talking about.
Even one of Cameron's prize winning ripostes, that Brown had given Britain "the debt levels of Italy and the accounting practices of Enron," failed to get him out of his hole.
The public deserve more from the opposition party. Earlier this week, it looked like they might get it – a real choice between fundamentally different approaches to the financial crisis. Today, that hope faded a little into the background, to be replaced by point scoring and public relations politics. Cameron has only himself to blame.
Ian Dunt