The Prime Minister was away today at the G8, enjoying the hospitality of Signor Berlusconi. As a consequence, Harriet Harman deputised for him at PMQs, and William Hague for David Cameron.
William attempted to get the Leader of the House to explain the Prime Minister’s bizarre turn of phrase at last week’s Questions:
Mr. Hague: Moving on to Government policy more broadly, will she put into plain English for everyone the Prime Minister’s assertion last week that
“total spending will continue to rise, and it will be a zero per cent. rise in 2013”?—[Official Report, 1 July 2009; Vol. 495, c. 294.]
A futile ambition. Harriet Harman’s response generated no light:
Ms Harman: The right hon. Gentleman will know that all the figures are set out in the Budget book. Our commitment is clear: we are making public investment now to help to back up the economy, get through the recession and ensure that it is shorter and shallower than it would otherwise be…. I understand that the shadow Chancellor revealed last week that he spends 40 per cent. of his time thinking about economics. It is amazing that he spends 40 per cent. of his time thinking about doing absolutely nothing.
No answer there, then. William tried again:
Mr. Hague: Perhaps the Leader of the House could spend 100 per cent. of the next minute trying to answer the question she was asked about what the Prime Minister meant by a “zero per cent. rise”. Is it not now clear that every single word of the assertion that he made last week is wrong—that total spending will not rise, and there will not even be a “zero per cent. rise”, as he bizarrely called it, in 2013, but that the figures in the Government’s books, which the Leader of House mentioned, show that there would be a fall?
It was no good; Harriet would have none of it. There was going to be no reduction in spending.
One last try for William:
Mr. Hague: The Leader of the House’s statement “We are not cutting capital spending”, when the Government’s figures show it declining from £44 billion to £22 billion, is exactly the sort of statement that damages the credibility of politics and the Government. It is no wonder that they are abandoning their numeracy strategy when Ministers will not admit that 22 is half of 44.
But Harman wouldn’t budge. She point-blank refused to acknowledge that there would be spending cuts.
I have to say I was genuinely disappointed in her. The most damning criticism of Gordon Brown, and one that is doing him real damage, is that he is taking the British people for fools in refusing to acknowledge the self-evident truth that public spending cuts are inevitable, whichever party wins power next year.
As a potential leadership candidate after Brown’s departure, Harriet Harman is doing herself no favours at all by adhering to the Prime Minister’s ludicrous and discredited line.
For an impartial analysis of the exchange between Hague and Harman, take a look at the Channel 4 website:
Whilst I will agree that it is the job of the opposition to question the government I firmly believe that when the PM is absent on other business it is a complete waste of time trying to get the Leader of the House to say a single word in opposition to that of the PM’s at Question Time.