William Hague, standing in for David Cameron, gave an accomplished performance as ever though it was one which was more restrained than normal. The Conservative front bench, which has showed signs of removing its bipartisan shackles the last day or two, obviously still feels the time is not right to go for the government's jugular on the economy. However, there was much more critique of the government than last week's woeful efforts - thank god!
Hague challenged Harman on the rising unemployment figures and called on the government to reform the insolvency laws.
In reply, Harman said the government had made changes to the insolvency laws in the 2003 Enterprise Act. She said unemployment was lower than in 1997 and announced a £100 million package to help people back into work.
Hague retorted that she should not be so complacent about unemployment by referring to 1997 as unemployment is forecast to reach 3 million (if it does it will stop Labour harking back to the 1980s!!!), and he clinically took apart the £100 million programme which is not all it seems having been a combination of a re-announcement and money taken from an existing budget (what are the chances with this government?)
Harman said she wasn't being complacent and said Hague should not write-off the economy (Is this going to be Labour's line of defence - any criticism of the government's handling of the economy will be turned around as unpatriotic; running-down the economy built off the back of hard working Britons? What a load of crap!)
Hague then came up with another practical suggestion about stopping pensioners being forced to buy an annuity now that would provide a poor pension given the depressed stock market. He called on the government to act on the Tory proposal without delay.
Harman said she was concerned about pensioners but Hague said it was all very well being concerned, what was needed was swift action.
Harman then said the last thing the Treasury needed was advice from her or from Hague. (Bipartisanship was beginning to look decidedly tenuous).
Hague then asked what the government meant when it said institutions bailed out will lend on 2007 levels - the height of boom and bust?
Harman replied that banks should indeed lend and not sit on capital. She said the government did not regret its investment in public services and claimed that the government had reduced public debt from 43% of GDP in 1997 to 37% thus allowing themselves now the space to increase government debt to back the economy if necessary. (A whopper of lie from Harman here. It was a 'Brownie' of which the PM would have been proud. Government debt currently stands at 43.4%, not 37%, so there is no 'room' to increase borrowing and keep the economy stable as she claims if one is still supposed to be sticking to the government's own 40% threshold. The government simply borrowed too much money during the good years).
In his best intervention, and most partisan, Hague said the government was "no longer in a position to boast about the economic record" of the last 11 years. He said Gordon Brown's claim to have abolished boom and bust was “one of the most foolish, hubristic and irresponsible claims ever made by a UK prime minister.”
Harman said it was a serious moment for the economy which was met with derisory laughter in the Commons (well, duh!) and she again repeated her line that Hague should not write off the British economy or compare it unfavourably with other countries. (Come off it! Brown has compared the UK's economy to other countries during the good years to make himself look good for a decade. Now the economy looks like going down the toilet, the government can't claim that international comparisons are suddenly not allowed). She concluded by saying the PM will take action to protect the UK economy and help stabilise the global situation and weakly described Brown as a "man with a plan" - using Cameron's line from the Tory conference.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Vince Cable got to his feet a short time after asking how prepared was the government for the major rise in unemployment at a time when it had cut staff at benefit and unemployment offices? He also asked whether Harman could make sure those looking for loans were treated as favourably as the bankers were this week.
Harman said he was absolutely right. She said action had been taken to ensure credit is flowing back into small businesses and the housing market. She said the latest jobs figures were very concerning but claimed there were 600,000 vacancies in economy. (That will put people's minds to rest).
Cable then said he had got the sense that the minister didn't realise it's an emergency. He asked why hadn't the government and Tories changed their vow of silence on interest rates. He said cuts were necessary to prevent a deep slump.
Harman said she didn't accept his comments on the government being unprepared. And in her best moment of the entire PMQs she said she didn't know what Cable was talking about in relation to interest rates as there had been a cut last week.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Other points worth making about PMQs was that Tory backbenchers seem determined not to let the government off the hook about the economy and don't seem committed to bipartisanship. A couple of Tory MPs brought up Equitable life and Philip Davies accused Brown's tripartite regulatory regime of failure. Harman struggled with these questions but said it was wrong to say Brown was responsible for the banking crisis when its origins were global.
The Tory front bench really needs to start hitting Brown hard on his profligate spending/borrowing, hubristic claims to have ended 'boom and bust' and the fact that his own regulatory system was not fit for purpose.
Returning to Harman though, i'd guess that if one was a Labour supporter, watching her would prove a nervous experience. Watching her deputise for the Prime Minister is like watching a car crash in slow motion.
Today, the politically correct Leader of the House looked badly out of depth, awkward, and uncomfortable - particularly having to deal with the numerous economic questions that came at her.
PMQs RATINGS:
Harman 5; Hague 7; Cable 6
No comments:
Post a Comment