POST REMOVED - An apology for a mistake

I made a gross error of judgement and posted about comments i had read that Nick Robinson was alleged to have made regarding Cameron not being able to expect any electoral advantage from this tragic event "as Gordon Brown has already lost a child of his own."

Nick Robinson made no such comment so a sincere apology to him.

I will learn in the future to go on first hand information, rather than second hand, unsubstantiated rumour. Sorry again.

Those who want to listen to the measured and sympathetic words from Nick Robinson can do so by clicking here.

Mervyn King and a fiscal stimulus

Labour were said to be very pleased with the Governor of the Bank of England's comments regarding the need for a fiscal stimulus - "In these extraordinary circumstances it would be perfectly reasonable to see some use of fiscal stimulus." The BBC's Nick Robinson leapt on these comments saying it put the Tories in a difficult spot.

But Benedict Brogan has an excellent post in which he shows the Governor's remarks are not as helpful for Labour as Robinson would have us believe.

To summarise:

1. Although Merv is difficult to sack, he is nonetheless still on the public payroll so he is hardly going to start attacking Government policy, especially as it could spook the markets.
2. Merv put some pretty big caveats on his support for a fiscal stimulus (it has to be temporary and we have to be told how the public finances will be returned to health in the medium term).
3. Seeking to both stimulate the economy and raise its own popularity in the run-up to the next election, the Government would prefer any fiscal stimulus to be large and appear to be permanent, and will aim to downplay the extent to which any fiscal loosening is temporary. A temporary tax cut is likely to be largely saved rather than spent. And, a temporary fiscal stimulus combined with a credible plan to medium-term deficit reduction means a commitment to subsequent tax hikes and/or public spending squeeze, which makes it less politically attractive as well.

So, not exactly the wholesale endorsement of Labour's economic policy, hey Nick?

BBC Bias #1

I mentioned this in my post on PMQs yesterday, but it deserves a post of its own as the BBC's Nick Robinson really was out of order yesterday in his remarks about Cameron's decision to go on the tragic story of Baby P.

As a reminder, this is what he wrote on his blog yesterday (points he had made earlier on the BBC's Daily Politics):

"It's clear that David Cameron was much keener to talk about this case rather than about the topic pretty much everyone expected him to raise - the economy. Before PMQs began, he had written a piece for the London Evening Standard which they'd splashed on their front page. This may have been because he felt passionately about it. It may also have been because he wanted to avoid a debate about taxes and the case for a fiscal stimulus - a view that would have been reinforced by today's comments by the governor of the Bank of England which posed some very awkward questions for the Tories.

What's also clear is that Labour backbenchers were relishing the prospect of a political punch-up on the economy. That's why they shouted when the Tory leader chose another subject. That, perhaps, is what was in the prime minister's mind when he suggested that Cameron was playing politics.

My immediate reaction on the Daily Politics on BBC2 was to say that the prime minister had shown a "political tone-deafness" to the mood outside Westminster and that Mr Cameron probably could not believe his "political luck" that he managed to avoid talking about the economy. Labour's John Cruddas and the Lib Dems' Charles Kennedy - who were in the studio with me - agreed. Interestingly, some who were watching in the Commons gallery did not. They thought the Tory leader's visible loss of temper showed him in a very poor light."

This is absolute biased nonsense with Robinson seeking to defend and offer excuses for the shameful behaviour of Gordon Brown and Labour MPs at ever turn.

I just don't get why Cameron would not want to go on the economy. If you were to just listen to Robinson and the rest of the BBC you would think that Cameron is responsible for the shit we find ourselves in, not Gordon who presided over the Treasury as Chancellor for a decade spending vast sums of our money irresponsibly and who has now just dumped his fiscal rules which were the very bedrock of his economic policy (the equivalent to Labour of the ERM to the Tories).

Robinson over blows comments the Governor of the Bank of England made about a fiscal stimulus being a positive temporary measure and says Cameron effectively used Baby P because it meant he would not have to face questions about tax during PMQs. But hang on there Nicky boy... Cameron had his own aces on the economy to go on. He had the prediction that unemployment would be 2 million by Christmas. A nice present from Father Gordon. Cameron also had the Governor's prediction that the economy would contract by 2 percent next year. So if anything, a debate on the economy would have ended as a score draw. In addition, why should Cameron have faced difficult questions? It is Prime Minister's Questions, not Leader of the Opposition's Questions - no matter how much Brown likes to pervert the half hour. Robinson is also insinuating that Cameron ran away from the economy. I'm sorry, but out of the two leaders, it is clear from past behaviour that the only coward, the only man lacking in courage, is Gordon Brown who has repeatedly ducked difficulties and run away like good ol' McCavity whenever the going gets tough. Moreover, it is clear from the beginning of the exchange that Cameron intended to get on to the economy - he even said so - but that he was so taken aback by Brown's response that he could not let the issue drop. Robinson is being disingenuous to suggest otherwise.

As for the excuse he gave for the behaviour of Labour MPs - that they were expecting a heated debate on the economy - this is no justification. These are grown men and women who behaved outrageously. The Speaker, Michael Martin, had the heart and political nous to realise that the Labour MPs were out of order and he had to repeatedly remind them that what was being discussed was the death of a baby. The Speaker has taken some flak for his reported bias towards Labour but even he could see Labour MPs were in the wrong, even if Robinson couldn't and felt compelled to defend the indefensible!

As for Robinson's assertion that Jon Cruddas and Charles Kennedy agreed with his analysis in the Daily Politics studio, i would suggest that he is as "tone deaf" as the Prime Minister. They certainly did not agree with him! They said Cameron was right to bring up the story and that the Prime Minister and Labour MPs had misjudged the mood by their response.

Finally, Cameron losing his rag showed he was passionate about an appalling tragedy. Brown's apparent calmness, prepared script and focus on procedure made him look out of touch, cold-hearted and lacking in empathy. But that's not what Robinson reported. Oh no, no mention of Brown lacking humanity, only Cameron showing himself in a "very poor light." No Nick, Gordon Brown, Labour and you were shown in a "very poor light" yesterday.

The BBC really needs to get its act together. Robinson did not like the outcome of PMQs yesterday because it did not fit into the new narrative he is partly responsible for constructing - that is, 'Gordon the comeback king', 'Gordon the saviour'. Labour weren't the only ones wanting the economy to take centre stage at PMQs - Nick Robinson and the BBC wanted it too. But PMQs showed Brown in a very poor light and reminded us of his failings as a Prime Minister whenever the subject moves beyond his economic comfort zone. It also reminded us, as Guido put it yesterday, that "Gordon is Emotionally Retarded."

I could not have put it better myself!

PMQs - Callous PM & Labour Party

PMQs was an extraordinary and riveting affair today. Most would have expected the economy to dominate today as David Cameron had the news that unemployment is forecast to hit 2 million by Christmas and the Bank of England has predicted the economy will contract by 2 percent, to go on. Brown and Labour no doubt were also looking forward to the economy being brought up after the Governor of the Bank of England today gave tentative support to a fiscal stimulus package proposed by the government.

However, that is not what happened. Cameron intended to go on the economy but first wanted to raise the horrific case of poor Baby P, a 17 month old baby boy, who had been repeatedly tortured and then murdered by his mother and two men (one of which was the mother's boyfriend). Baby P had head injuries, a broken back, nine fractured ribs, fingernails and a toenail missing, a severe mouth injury, a ripped ear and extensive bruising on his body. He was found dead in his blood spattered cot. The three despicable people have now been convicted (though not sentenced yet). Prosecuting QC Sally O’Neill told how a family friend revealed the depth of the abuse as the child was used like a punchbag. She said the stepdad would “pick him up by his throat, punch him and spin him around on the computer chair until he fell off.” What is truly shocking is that on Baby P's final day alive, August 2, police told his mother that they would take no further action over suspicions she had assaulted him.

Cameron understandably wanted to know why Sharon Shoesmith, the Children's Services director of Haringey's Children's Services department was being allowed to investigate her own department. Let us also remember this is the same Haringey Children's Services department which had failed to protect Victoria Climbié 8 years ago.

The PM responded with his usual prevarication, giving a dry response focusing on process and procedure. He even talked about executive summaries! But unsurprisingly, Brown did not answer the question.

Cameron asked again. And again no answer from Brown.

Cameron had meant to go on to his set of economic questions by this point but he was incensed by Brown's response. He said he had asked a straightforward question and had received no answer. The Labour MPs were loudly barracking the Tory leader at this point and the Speaker was forced to intervene and tell them to be quiet on what was a very serious matter. Cameron became angry and quite emotional and laid into the Labour Party. He detailed the horrific nature of the case and the abject failure of the social services. He asked his question for a third time but said he did not expect an answer from Brown.

The PM went back to his pre-prepared point about the Laming report and the national inquiry being conducted by Lord Laming. But then Brown made a grotesque error. Always the factional, partisan politician, he accused David Cameron of trying to make the death of Baby P into a party political issue!

The Conservative benches went mad but not as mad as Cameron who went apoplectic with rage and rightly so. Brown had made an outrageous suggestion. Cameron said the PM had made a cheap point after he had asked some very reasonable questions. He asked Brown to withdraw the attack.

Brown withdraw any remark? You must be kidding! To do that he would have to admit to making a mistake and an error of judgement which Brown with his huge chip on his shoulder and character flaw just simply cannot do. So with no sense of the trouble he was in, Brown just said there was common ground and again pointed to the steps he was going to take.

Cameron was not going to let this lie. He said Brown had accused him of party politics. Cameron said he had intentionally not mentioned that Labour ran Haringey Council and nor had he done so at the time of the Victoria Climbié inquiry. He asked again for the PM to please withdraw the comment.

The PM had lost the plot and just said that the whole House would want to be united. It was a bit late for that Gordon after your shameful antics!

Cameron, in his last intervention, said in a resigned, and disappointed tone that Brown won't withdraw the remark. He said he had only been trying to raise the point made by Brown's own Children's minister that people should not investigate their own conduct.

The PM merely said there would be an independent investigation and immediate action.

PMQs today has shown Gordon Brown and the Labour Party in damning light. Their behaviour was shameful and extremely callous given what was being discussed was the tragic, and avoidable death, of a 17 month old baby boy.

Brown looked evasive, shaky and cold hearted. He looked like he was trying to score points. The PM is politically tone deaf. He comes across as inhuman because he completely lacks empathy.

In contrast, Cameron was genuinely passionate and humane. This was not synthetic rage. He had said at the very beginning of his exchange with Brown that he had intended to go on the economy afterwards but he was so taken aback by Brown's response that he could not let it drop.

At this point it is worth mentioning Nick Robinson who, along with Brown and Labour, did not cover himself in glory. The BBC's political editor was on the Daily Politics show and he took the very cynical view that Cameron's decision to use all 6 questions was a combination of genuine disgust at the PM and political calculation that he couldn't believe his luck as it meant he did not have to go on the economy. He also tried to defend the Labour benches saying they were fired up to attack Cameron on the economy. I would say that such comments are not very becoming of Robinson and quite frankly indefensible. Even Jon Cruddas (Labour) and Charles Kennedy (Lib Dem) - both in the studio - did not make such crass comments. In fact they gave dignified responses which reflected well on both of them.

Had Cameron faced Tony Blair at the dispatch box today, PMQs would have been an entirely different affair. Blair always had a knack of being able to judge the political mood and he would have shown the requisite empathy that the situation deserved rather than badly miscalculating and turning an issue that ought to have unified the House into a bad tempered political affair.

I'd also say that the Speaker, Michael Martin, who has had his detractors of late - me included - performed excellently today, as he has of late. He had to intervene several times during the Brown/Cameron exchange and it was clear to me that he judged the public mood much better than Brown and reprimanded the Labour MPs for their barracking on the sensitive issue. Credit is given when it's due. Well done Mr Martin!

PMQs Ratings

The only one that matters:

Brown - 0/10 - The Prime Minister and the Labour Party were an absolute disgrace today!!!