IMMEASURABLY sad Rachel Reeves, flanked Keir Starmer last week at the last PMQ’s before recess. She had the look of a woman about to ask for Angela at the bar. Rachel went along with the parliamentary gesturing with vigorous nodding, headshaking, and mirthless laughter, but her heart really didn’t look in it.
Keir’s other flank was David Lammy, who had the theatrics on autopilot with the contented look of a man without a care in the world, save wondering whether this year he should try Goa. He’d better look at a World Atlas.
At Keir’s rear there was a voluptuous female MP in a vermillion dress MP sitting behind him, and although most certainly coincidental, she brought distraction and colour to the PM’s palette taken from applying 50 Shades of Grey too literally. With such minders in place, Keir was ready for verbal battle and he and his opponent chose their word weapons.
Kemi’s weapon of choice was reasoning, taken from the Govite armoury, whilst Keir chose word hurling – more suited to a son of a toolmaker.
Kemi’s choice required precision; you said x=y? Now you are saying x and y are different? Can you explain?
Word-hurlers throws rocks of generalisations, new subjects, put-downs, faked outrage until the questioning stops. Keir won hands down because rock always beats scissors. Kemi has a pretty voice, and is clear and logical in her reasoning, but if she thinks these will work, she’s damned.
If someone is louder, has the room, or has no one forcing them to answer then hurling is unbeatable.
Kemi needs to change her strategy. She is metaphorically bringing a knife to a gunfight. Reasoning assumes fairness and a search for answers. It has no place in the House of Commons.
Kemi’s questions should not be dainty and clever. Questions that point out the obvious are unhelpful. Voters know that politicians say one thing and do another. Questions about Downing Street staff are a waste of time. Chiefs of staff such as Allistair Campbell and his ilk may find themselves endlessly fascinating, but the public? We couldn’t care less about Morgan McWhoever of behind-the-scenes.
Kemi, you can be clever, cryptic and pointed, or Kemi, you can win the argument. Here’s some rocks to hurl.
- Mr Speaker, I’d like to ask the prime minister if he could confirm to voters, that whilst he can tolerate paedophile apologists, that he does draw a red line regarding giving away state secrets?
- Mr Speaker, given that so many people have cunningly managed to pull the wool over his eyes should he delegate responsibility for giving out jobs to someone more shrewd?
- Mr Speaker, the Prime Minister has put the responsibility for his mistakes on the system, other people, Tories, Liz Truss, criminal investigations, state security. By his own admission he is Red Riding Hood, naïve and trusting of obvious wolves. Does the Prime Minister trust his own judgement about whether his cabinet are dressed as grandma and ready to eat him up?
Sorry to be harsh Kemi, but it’s for the best. And remember that ballot paper wraps rock.
Established in 2006, ThinkScotland is not for profit and relies on donations to continue publishing our wide range of opinions – you can subscribe to our newsletter here, follow us on X here – like and comment on facebook here and support ThinkScotland by making a donation here.
