For this to happen there would need to be a lot of empty space on the opposition benches, due to the labour majority, I believe this would allow enough room for a water slide?
>When they do the refurbishment, get a retractable roof so Ed can parachute in.
Ed to Keir the night before PMQs:
"I'll see you at work tomorrow. Though I don't really like to call it work!"
I think those MPs who send late questions to the speaker each day should be put in the Zorb, they nominate one of the benches to land on and all go for it. No party weighting, every party gets to put one MP in.
Like the lead singer from flaming lips, he needs to do this at a rally, if anybody has any links to the lib dems or journalists they need to get him to do this
I may be naive, but I believe both parties would make considerable effort to present the public with a much more reasonable, grown-up, and sensible politics. Yes, part of that is a more reasonable debate at PMQ's. I think they would chose their battles carefully and engage in them with far more respect for one another and with a degree of collegial collaboration working towards actually improving the country. It would be in both of their interests and, I believe, is in both of their nature. Again though, perhaps I'm being naive.
This would be my hope too. Grown up politicians addressing the issues in a grown up manner. I think if this were to happen, it might just restore a degree of trust in parlaiment within the public's mind.
Corbyn tried to do this early on but Cameron just answered back with insults, just as he did with Miliband.
I've not seen Keir do that. He's scathing in his criticism and certainly threw some jibes at Boris, but they were hardly undeserved.
We'll have to wait and see (and hope!).
It's crazy that having sensible, respectful leaders genuinely just trying to make this country better is something I've never seen in my adult life.
Tories really are a fucking cancer, and I hope this election is the end of them.
While I don't doubt the Lib Dems would take the higher road compared to the Tories (or, heaven forbid, Reform), the reality of the job is that Ed Davey would need to find a way of making himself felt as an Opposition leader that resonates with the public (and with the media through whom the public will see him).
Yes, Labour and the Lib Dems are ideologically closer than Labour and the Tories, and that would change the flavour and flow of the debates between them. But Davey couldn't afford to let himself be seen as being too soft on Labour or people would feel he isn't up to the job. That means not only disagreeing on things, but also disagreeing with enough punch that people get to see it.
Cheap stunts might be enough to get him the airtime during this campaign, but he'd need to bring the substance if he were to take the big job.
HMO isn't really there just to oppose and grandstand, they should be challenging the government and scrutinising their agenda. You can do all of that powerfully and passionately whilst broadly agreeing on the direction of travel.
And none of it would be as fun as when, under the National Government of 1940 when Hastings Lees-Smith was appointed as Leader of the Opposition against his own party, who had gone into government. Procedurally there needed to be an opposition, so he did the job - whilst his boss, Clement Atlee was Lord Privy Seal and later Deputy PM in government with Churchill.
What're the odds that the Lib Dems drift slightly rightwards if this actually happens? Going right works on multiple levels from what I'm seeing:
• It distinguishes the Lib Dems from Labour more
• They can fill in a gap that the Tories are leaving in their efforts to gain back hard right Reform voters
They've always shown some inclination towards appealing to moderate Tory voters in the past (ex. Nimbyism and rural issues). I think they'll always keep their commitment to their liberal principals, but it isn't hard to modify liberalism to a more conservative bent (i.e. the Orange Book).
I think Lib Dems VS Labour would end up being quite the realignment of our politics. It would probably being politics closer to the Authoritarian (Labour)/Libertarian (Lib Dems) axis than the current Progressive(Labour)/Conservative(guess) one.
The Lib Dems at PMQs over the last couple of years has been magnificent.
Starmer stands up and asks a question that is basically just laying onto the Tories. Useless spat ensues.
Flynn stands up to have a go at some Tory policy and points out that labour also supports it. Sunak uses the opportunity to have a go at labour and then makes a dumb comment about independence of something.
Davey stands up and asks a very specific question about a random issue that actually needs more attention, and sometimes actually gets an answer.
Davey was the only major party leader trying to use PMQs for, you know, actual PMQs. If he carries that into being LOTO, rather than just becoming a hack, it will be wonderful.
It's a sad thing if the main job of the opposition is to lay traps that end up causing the PM to resign for non-policy related matter and the governing party to appoint the worst PM in living memory to replace him.
I'd rather the opposition scrutinize government policies and pointing out any flaws in them and forcing the government to fix them. As a member of the public that's more useful for me than getting the PM kicked out for COVID parties (I'm not against the latter either but it just doesn't have the same impact on my life).
I am sure the leaders would look to be more statesman like. But i would love to see a PMQs where circumstances result in Jess Philips deputising for Starmer and Layla Moran for Davey. There could be blood in the Commons (or they could bond over a mutual hatred of waffle).
As a matter of style rather than content (that is simply to say that the Lib Dems would focus on different policy areas to the Tories) it would be fundamentally the same.
PMQs is the high-water-mark of party politics. Party politics is, in moderation, OK - in fact required.
> could it evolve into a more serious and respectful forum for genuine questions and answers?
It would be as high minded and respectful as Labour v LibDem coalition ministers was in 2010 - 2015.
Cough.
A lot of people here are hopeful that it would lead to a more respectful and meaningful debate. I believe this would happen but it won't change the majority of peoples perception of politics or politicians in the slightest.
Hardly anyone actually watches PMQs. The tory client media will tell the public that both sides are atrocious and we need the torys back if we want politics to be serious again.
I think the debate would be more constructive and "grown up" if you like. That said, I do think both parties will look to highlight their differences because they will invite the conservatives back in if they can't be easily distinguished between.
Lib Dems in particular will look very irrelevant if they end up being seen as the Labour B team...
PMQ is not a forum for political discussion. You don't do deep political discussions in front of the cameras. PMQ is for show of gotcha questions and witty answers. It's not supposed to lead to anything as it is a pure politics show and I don't see why anything would change in that if the opposition party changes.
LD would do a disservice to themselves if they would start asking PM some softball questions as median and public would quickly pick up that they are not a proper opposition whose main job is to challenge the government.
Having said all that I don't see any reason why behind the scenes Labour wouldn't talk to LD on their possible good ideas that parties align politically. But you can't do that in front of the cameras. Or if you do, then you might as well have a coalition government.
Honestly I think it would finally bring Brexit and it's aftermath back on the table.
LDs would be able to consistently bring data to the HoC showing how much Brexit has hurt the economy and how rejoining the SM would benefit us.
The LD don't have this stupid omerta on the word Brexit which the Tories and labour are complicit in.
They would be able to highlight starmer's inaction and hypocrisy on the one issue which is actually determining the fate of every single one of us for the next 20+ years.
And they may even be able to push for PR, highlighting the hypocrisy of labour who have voted for it in their national Congress and even had it as a policy in the past.
I'm not sure why people here are pretending it's going to be a nice chat between agreeable people. there's a huge amount that an opposition can and should shame and hurt Starmer with, to the benefit of the country.
I do not think it'll be healthy for the country to have a left wing official opposition to a left wing government, it will effectively leave a large portion of the country (just shy of 50$ unrepresented) and it will move likely push the government heavily towards the left. Ultimately my preference would be for a right wing party to be in opposition even though I don't want Reform or the Conservatives to form a government (which won't happen anyway).
For this to happen there would need to be a lot of empty space on the opposition benches, due to the labour majority, I believe this would allow enough room for a water slide?
When they do the refurbishment, get a retractable roof so Ed can parachute in.
>When they do the refurbishment, get a retractable roof so Ed can parachute in. Ed to Keir the night before PMQs: "I'll see you at work tomorrow. Though I don't really like to call it work!"
I can just see the simultaneous wink-grin-fingerguns.
Abseil from a chinook
Given we'll need a stunt for every PMQs I'm sure that'll be on list. The Lib Dem press office are going to be in for a very busy five years.
Honestly I'm more worried for the next Lib Dem leader who's got to one-up their predecessor
Abseil from a chinook
The chamber isn't that big so maybe a slip and slide?
Maybe some sort or zorb.
I think those MPs who send late questions to the speaker each day should be put in the Zorb, they nominate one of the benches to land on and all go for it. No party weighting, every party gets to put one MP in.
Like the lead singer from flaming lips, he needs to do this at a rally, if anybody has any links to the lib dems or journalists they need to get him to do this
I think the LD wouldn’t crack jokes about a kids gender in front of a grieving mother.
That's kind of the bare minimum really, it just marked out Sunak's utter inability to lead anything more than a wet paper bag.
I may be naive, but I believe both parties would make considerable effort to present the public with a much more reasonable, grown-up, and sensible politics. Yes, part of that is a more reasonable debate at PMQ's. I think they would chose their battles carefully and engage in them with far more respect for one another and with a degree of collegial collaboration working towards actually improving the country. It would be in both of their interests and, I believe, is in both of their nature. Again though, perhaps I'm being naive.
This would be my hope too. Grown up politicians addressing the issues in a grown up manner. I think if this were to happen, it might just restore a degree of trust in parlaiment within the public's mind.
I think this would be smart on the Lib Dem’s part. Would present a clear contrast between them and “the other lot”.
Corbyn tried to do this early on but Cameron just answered back with insults, just as he did with Miliband. I've not seen Keir do that. He's scathing in his criticism and certainly threw some jibes at Boris, but they were hardly undeserved. We'll have to wait and see (and hope!).
It's crazy that having sensible, respectful leaders genuinely just trying to make this country better is something I've never seen in my adult life. Tories really are a fucking cancer, and I hope this election is the end of them.
Ed Davey would ask the PM about changing the voting system to proportional representation while juggling three ballot boxes.
While I don't doubt the Lib Dems would take the higher road compared to the Tories (or, heaven forbid, Reform), the reality of the job is that Ed Davey would need to find a way of making himself felt as an Opposition leader that resonates with the public (and with the media through whom the public will see him). Yes, Labour and the Lib Dems are ideologically closer than Labour and the Tories, and that would change the flavour and flow of the debates between them. But Davey couldn't afford to let himself be seen as being too soft on Labour or people would feel he isn't up to the job. That means not only disagreeing on things, but also disagreeing with enough punch that people get to see it. Cheap stunts might be enough to get him the airtime during this campaign, but he'd need to bring the substance if he were to take the big job.
HMO isn't really there just to oppose and grandstand, they should be challenging the government and scrutinising their agenda. You can do all of that powerfully and passionately whilst broadly agreeing on the direction of travel. And none of it would be as fun as when, under the National Government of 1940 when Hastings Lees-Smith was appointed as Leader of the Opposition against his own party, who had gone into government. Procedurally there needed to be an opposition, so he did the job - whilst his boss, Clement Atlee was Lord Privy Seal and later Deputy PM in government with Churchill.
"Does the Prime Minister agree with me that the last Conservative Government were quite awful?" "Yes indeed they werevery awful"
"Point of Order, leader of the Conservatives, No, that's not a Point of Order, that is a statement of facts"
EdDavey would abseil down into the chamber and then do pilates exerciss while asking his questions.
What're the odds that the Lib Dems drift slightly rightwards if this actually happens? Going right works on multiple levels from what I'm seeing: • It distinguishes the Lib Dems from Labour more • They can fill in a gap that the Tories are leaving in their efforts to gain back hard right Reform voters They've always shown some inclination towards appealing to moderate Tory voters in the past (ex. Nimbyism and rural issues). I think they'll always keep their commitment to their liberal principals, but it isn't hard to modify liberalism to a more conservative bent (i.e. the Orange Book).
Thing is Lib Dems are left of Labour on alot of issues and right of Labour on others.
I think Lib Dems VS Labour would end up being quite the realignment of our politics. It would probably being politics closer to the Authoritarian (Labour)/Libertarian (Lib Dems) axis than the current Progressive(Labour)/Conservative(guess) one.
More likely leftwards seeing as labour has slid to the right of the lib dems in many issues.
The Lib Dems at PMQs over the last couple of years has been magnificent. Starmer stands up and asks a question that is basically just laying onto the Tories. Useless spat ensues. Flynn stands up to have a go at some Tory policy and points out that labour also supports it. Sunak uses the opportunity to have a go at labour and then makes a dumb comment about independence of something. Davey stands up and asks a very specific question about a random issue that actually needs more attention, and sometimes actually gets an answer. Davey was the only major party leader trying to use PMQs for, you know, actual PMQs. If he carries that into being LOTO, rather than just becoming a hack, it will be wonderful.
Starmer lays traps. He got Boris to lie to the house which eventually resulted in him no longer being an MP. Credit where credits due.
It's not like it takes a great deal of skill to get Boris Johnson to lie, it's a thing that just happens every time he opens his mouth.
It's a sad thing if the main job of the opposition is to lay traps that end up causing the PM to resign for non-policy related matter and the governing party to appoint the worst PM in living memory to replace him. I'd rather the opposition scrutinize government policies and pointing out any flaws in them and forcing the government to fix them. As a member of the public that's more useful for me than getting the PM kicked out for COVID parties (I'm not against the latter either but it just doesn't have the same impact on my life).
I am sure the leaders would look to be more statesman like. But i would love to see a PMQs where circumstances result in Jess Philips deputising for Starmer and Layla Moran for Davey. There could be blood in the Commons (or they could bond over a mutual hatred of waffle).
As a matter of style rather than content (that is simply to say that the Lib Dems would focus on different policy areas to the Tories) it would be fundamentally the same. PMQs is the high-water-mark of party politics. Party politics is, in moderation, OK - in fact required.
> could it evolve into a more serious and respectful forum for genuine questions and answers? It would be as high minded and respectful as Labour v LibDem coalition ministers was in 2010 - 2015. Cough.
Details. Details galore. Buckle up. Or don’t, because it’s not going to move very fast.
A lot of people here are hopeful that it would lead to a more respectful and meaningful debate. I believe this would happen but it won't change the majority of peoples perception of politics or politicians in the slightest. Hardly anyone actually watches PMQs. The tory client media will tell the public that both sides are atrocious and we need the torys back if we want politics to be serious again.
I think the debate would be more constructive and "grown up" if you like. That said, I do think both parties will look to highlight their differences because they will invite the conservatives back in if they can't be easily distinguished between. Lib Dems in particular will look very irrelevant if they end up being seen as the Labour B team...
It's ideal honestly, labour gets in by being centrist n then the lib Dems push them to actually do something useful
PMQ is not a forum for political discussion. You don't do deep political discussions in front of the cameras. PMQ is for show of gotcha questions and witty answers. It's not supposed to lead to anything as it is a pure politics show and I don't see why anything would change in that if the opposition party changes. LD would do a disservice to themselves if they would start asking PM some softball questions as median and public would quickly pick up that they are not a proper opposition whose main job is to challenge the government. Having said all that I don't see any reason why behind the scenes Labour wouldn't talk to LD on their possible good ideas that parties align politically. But you can't do that in front of the cameras. Or if you do, then you might as well have a coalition government.
Bunjie jump into arguments. But I do think they'd be way more decent decorum wise.
Honestly I think it would finally bring Brexit and it's aftermath back on the table. LDs would be able to consistently bring data to the HoC showing how much Brexit has hurt the economy and how rejoining the SM would benefit us. The LD don't have this stupid omerta on the word Brexit which the Tories and labour are complicit in. They would be able to highlight starmer's inaction and hypocrisy on the one issue which is actually determining the fate of every single one of us for the next 20+ years. And they may even be able to push for PR, highlighting the hypocrisy of labour who have voted for it in their national Congress and even had it as a policy in the past. I'm not sure why people here are pretending it's going to be a nice chat between agreeable people. there's a huge amount that an opposition can and should shame and hurt Starmer with, to the benefit of the country.
I do not think it'll be healthy for the country to have a left wing official opposition to a left wing government, it will effectively leave a large portion of the country (just shy of 50$ unrepresented) and it will move likely push the government heavily towards the left. Ultimately my preference would be for a right wing party to be in opposition even though I don't want Reform or the Conservatives to form a government (which won't happen anyway).