X

Create an account to continue reading.

Registered readers have access to our blogs and a limited number of magazine articles
For unlimited access to The Spectator, subscribe below

Registered readers have access to our blogs and a limited number of magazine articles

Sign in to continue

Already have an account?

What's my subscriber number?

Subscribe now from £1 a week

Online

Unlimited access to The Spectator including the full archive from 1828

Print

Weekly delivery of the magazine

App

Phone & tablet edition of the magazine

Spectator Club

Subscriber-only offers, events and discounts
 
View subscription offers

Already a subscriber?

or

Subscribe now for unlimited access

ALL FROM JUST £1 A WEEK

View subscription offers

Thank you for creating your account – To update your details click here to manage your account

Thank you for creating your account – To update your details click here to manage your account

Thank you for creating an account – Your subscriber number was not recognised though. To link your subscription visit the My Account page

Thank you for creating your account – To update your details click here to manage your account

X

Login

Don't have an account? Sign up
X

Subscription expired

Your subscription has expired. Please go to My Account to renew it or view subscription offers.

X

Forgot Password

Please check your email

If the email address you entered is associated with a web account on our system, you will receive an email from us with instructions for resetting your password.

If you don't receive this email, please check your junk mail folder.

X

It's time to subscribe.

You've read all your free Spectator magazine articles for this month.

Subscribe now for unlimited access – from just £1 a week

You've read all your free Spectator magazine articles for this month.

Subscribe now for unlimited access

Online

Unlimited access to The Spectator including the full archive from 1828

Print

Weekly delivery of the magazine

App

Phone & tablet edition of the magazine

Spectator Club

Subscriber-only offers, events and discounts
X

Sign up

What's my subscriber number? Already have an account?

Thank you for creating your account – To update your details click here to manage your account

Thank you for creating your account – To update your details click here to manage your account

Thank you for creating an account – Your subscriber number was not recognised though. To link your subscription visit the My Account page

Thank you for creating your account – To update your details click here to manage your account

X

Your subscriber number is the 8 digit number printed above your name on the address sheet sent with your magazine each week.

Entering your subscriber number will enable full access to all magazine articles on the site.

If you cannot find your subscriber number then please contact us on customerhelp@subscriptions.co.uk or call 0330 333 0050.

You can create an account in the meantime and link your subscription at a later time. Simply visit the My Account page, enter your subscriber number in the relevant field and click 'submit changes'.

Please note: Previously subscribers used a 'WebID' to log into the website. Your subscriber number is not the same as the WebID. Please ensure you use the subscriber number when you link your subscription.

Coffee House

PMQs needs reforming but it shouldn’t be toned down

11 February 2014

9:57 PM

11 February 2014

9:57 PM

To anyone in Westminster, Prime Minister’s Questions is terrific fun and a good measurement of how the leaders are doing every week. But what does the rest of the country think of this rip roaring event? The Hansard Society has released a new report Tuned in or Turned off? Public attitudes to Prime Minister’s Questions to find out whether the nation enjoys the session as much as the keen political watchers do.

The report suggests that PMQs are seen a ‘cue’ for wider perceptions of Parliament, most of which are negative. The public dislikes the pantomime atmosphere, the political point scoring and general behaviour of MPs — which is likened to a school playground. Polling from the report suggests that two thirds of the public think there is too much party political point-scoring instead of answering serious questions:

[Alt-Text]



The Hansard Society offers a package of reforms, including moving PMQs to a Tuesday or Wednesday evening — the timings currently mean the 55+ age group are most likely to watch the whole thing. The paper also suggests the format ‘should be varied to facilitate a more discursive approach, pursuing genuine debate on just a few topical areas’. Questions from the Leader of the Opposition should be reduced while a ‘sin bin’ penalty could be introduced for disorderly conduct, with the power to remove MPs from the chamber.

Commentators like Dan Hodges and Iain Martin may have a point arguing that PMQs has become a ‘joke’ and a ‘contemptible farce’, but reform should not take the heart out of the event. Moving it to a Tuesday/Wednesday evening could indeed engage more people but ‘genuine debate’ is never going to happen in just half an hour, whatever time that debate is held. Plus, a ‘sin bin’ shouldn’t be needed if the speaker has authority over the house — which Bercow still commands.

BuzzFeed’s successful efforts to report on PMQs through animated GIFs suggests the event has interest beyond the audience described in the Hansard Society report. One very welcome reform would be to scrap the ludicrously archaic restrictions on filming Parliament, forbidding the use of footage in a ‘comedic or satirical context’. Then we could finally have something like The Daily Show with Jon Stewart in Britain. But there’s no need to turn PMQs into a dull Q&A purely to make the Commons look more agreeable. This would kill any interest in the event and push the public further away from ‘the great cockpit of the nation’.

Subscribe to The Spectator today for a quality of argument not found in any other publication. Get more Spectator for less – just £12 for 12 issues.


Show comments
Close