It has been commented that, in recent weeks, with Labour’s poll ratings stagnating or falling, and the Tories’ own ratings remaining stubbornly low, a mood of despondency has taken hold in the House of Commons. That certainly seemed the case today, with David Cameron offering up spiteful attacks against Ed Miliband and the party, and Labour’s backbenches focusing on rising poverty levels and bankers’ bonuses, but no real exchange on policies, beyond the 50p tax rate. Unlike previous weeks, it was less a pre-election battle, and more of a messy skirmish for both leaders.
Who won?
Ed started with solid questions on the new parliamentary commission on banking standards, which is calling for bankers to face criminal penalties for malpractice. While Cameron said he supports the proposals in the report, Ed quizzed him further on the specific recommendation on criminal charges, and said that if Cameron fails to introduce amendments to the current banking bill to this effect, Labour will. He then went on to accuse the government of making the bonuses situation worse, encouraging a 64 per cent rise in bonuses by removing the 50p tax rate.
Cameron resorted to attacking Labour’s economic record, accusing the last government of failing to regulate the banks. However, while the substance of what Cameron was saying did not stack up, with Ed rightly reminding him that he, in 2008, accused Labour of overregulating the banks, he landed a solid punch by asserting that bank bonuses are now 85 per cent lower than in 2007-8. In addition, emphasising a recent comment by former Labour minister Paul Myners that we should have done more on regulation, he pointed towards the coalition government’s ringfencing of retail banks and the Bank of England’s new regulatory role.
As the Guardian’s Andrew Sparrow argued, Cameron won the round mainly for coming up with a larger statistic than Ed on bonuses. However, things started to get worse for Cameron as the session continued, with Labour backbencher after backbencher reminding him of the rising poverty rates, discrimination in the university admissions system and the rising wealth of the country’s richest individuals.
Posed a serious question by Paul Farrelly, over why the proportion of state-educated students entering Russell Group universities has fallen in the last decade, Cameron unconvincingly attacked Stephen Twigg’s education announcement this week, seeming to agree with Labour on the need for more parental control of schools, but disagreeing that Labour should be saying it.
The prime minister continued to avoid answering any questions of substance on the economy, brazenly attacking Labour for avoiding a tax payment for John Mills’ donation, having previously ducked difficult questions on his dropping of the 50p rate.
Best backbencher?
Labour’s Richard Burden probably posed the hardest to answer question of the session, asking why two-thirds of children in poverty are in a family where at least one person works, and why that figure is rising. The difficulty of the question prevented Cameron from giving one of his more common flippant replies, and simply said that work is the best way of getting people out of poverty, which Burden hadn’t argued with.
Best question, answer, comment or joke?
It was a session low on humour, but the oddest response came from Cameron himself who, in response to a question about Lynton Crosby, said that the only opinions he is interested in are ‘how we destroy the credibility of the Labour party.’ Given the current state of the economy, one would hope the prime minister is also interested in opinions on that.
—————————————————————————————
Ben Garratt is a member of Hampstead and Kilburn CLP. He tweets @Ben_Garratt
—————————————————————————————