I like the tone of the new style of PMQs. The usual snide, point scoring, in both question and answer, tells us nothing, and amounts to politics with a playground mindset. I actually managed to watch it right through, without turning over in disgust. And that's been true of both Labour and Tory PMs, for years.
However, two questions remain - can they both keep it up, and did it provide more accountability and information? Whether it will continue remains to be seen, and as for accountability, well it did, but only marginally.
The "questions from the public" was, I thought, quite clever. Given a choice of 40,000 possibles, it alliwed JC to ask what he wanted to ask, while dressing it up as questions from the public. And, of course, JCs staff could have, or might in the future, simply make up their own questions and attribute them to Paul from wherever.
My impression is that had JC simply tried to take DC on in the usual bearpit atmosphere, he'd have got eaten alive. Instead, he moved things to a mode DC is less comfortable in, if for no other reason than that for years, on both sides of the aisle, he's been used to the bearpit atmosphere.
The downside is that by asking vague, anodyne questions, JC hands the incentive to DC to simply justify and explain decisions. And even that is having caught DC unawares, not knowing what to expect. Next week, DC will be prepared for that.
Hopefully, if both sides can act like adults for a while, we might see actual, genuine sincere questions that aren't intended as political landmines to be avoided, and actual, genuine answers that aren't simply default damage-avoidance mode reactions.
It just might herald a new era of adult politics. But I don't give it much chance. I think it's 50/50 if it'll las the month, and about 5% it'll last the year. If that.
The really pathetic thing is that most of these politicians are quite capable of trying to rip each other's entrails out in the public arena, then going and having a tea, cake and laugh together in the privacy of the tea room. PMQs, old-style, was about 90% theatre put on for our benefit, or more accurately, the camera's benefit.
However, two questions remain - can they both keep it up, and did it provide more accountability and information? Whether it will continue remains to be seen, and as for accountability, well it did, but only marginally.
The "questions from the public" was, I thought, quite clever. Given a choice of 40,000 possibles, it alliwed JC to ask what he wanted to ask, while dressing it up as questions from the public. And, of course, JCs staff could have, or might in the future, simply make up their own questions and attribute them to Paul from wherever.
My impression is that had JC simply tried to take DC on in the usual bearpit atmosphere, he'd have got eaten alive. Instead, he moved things to a mode DC is less comfortable in, if for no other reason than that for years, on both sides of the aisle, he's been used to the bearpit atmosphere.
The downside is that by asking vague, anodyne questions, JC hands the incentive to DC to simply justify and explain decisions. And even that is having caught DC unawares, not knowing what to expect. Next week, DC will be prepared for that.
Hopefully, if both sides can act like adults for a while, we might see actual, genuine sincere questions that aren't intended as political landmines to be avoided, and actual, genuine answers that aren't simply default damage-avoidance mode reactions.
It just might herald a new era of adult politics. But I don't give it much chance. I think it's 50/50 if it'll las the month, and about 5% it'll last the year. If that.
The really pathetic thing is that most of these politicians are quite capable of trying to rip each other's entrails out in the public arena, then going and having a tea, cake and laugh together in the privacy of the tea room. PMQs, old-style, was about 90% theatre put on for our benefit, or more accurately, the camera's benefit.
