91Èȱ¬

It is a mark of surprising confidence that Blair feels able to attack Cameron in this way. After all, his own tenure has been characterised more by rapid footwork than power.

Nick
The battle lines are clearly drawn. A failed, shambolic excuse for a Government and its apologists in the 91Èȱ¬ - and the rest of us.
What I can't for the life of me understand is, why do you do it?

Nick,
You're quite right, Blair's childish remarks do read, and also sounded, like "a trivial or an unduly personal attack".It says so much about the abysmal level to which this useless government has sunk when this is the best you can say of Blair's speech.

Nick, was it a mistake or a slip when Lauren Booth said on "I'm a celebrity..." that Tony was going in January? She corrected herself to say "the summer" but didn't look convincing....

I agree totally with Nick's comments - Blair thumped Cameron in the Commons today and the Opposition leader's face gave it all away with his reactions to the PM's attacks on his speech. It was a class act by Blair, something that he has always been able to do in the Commons for 10 years and the Opposition need to get chuck the fairy floss and get into the area of substance if they are to have an impact and attract voters. After all, labour is not immune to criticism and now is the time for Cameron and his crowd to deliver the meat for the Britain.
cameron may have feared Blair, but he may well have to fear the coming advent of Brown.

Parliamentary knock-about makes and breaks reputations? Not in the great outside world it doesn't, Mr Robinson. If Mr Blair's grand-standing performances at the Dispatch Box had been matched by his competence and judgement as Prime Minister, he would indeed be leaving the Westminster scene a hero. Instead he has been full of sound and fury, signifying nothing.

But how nice to know that Downing Street aides were delighted. They have had little to delight them, of late. And they must be constantly watching in apprehension from behind the curtains, waiting for an inspector to call.

Nick, I think you've spent too much time in the Westminster jungle. Ability at the Dispatch box doth not good governance make, as a glance at TB's record will show - Iraq, pensions, the NHS, Education, Crime - all of these have produced some finely-crafted words from Tone, but they're all still a disaster. Have a holiday old son, and meet some real people.

Hi Nick,

I know you try to stay impartial, but so often, as now, your bias is revealed in your tone.

Oh, and if you honestly think it's surprising that TB wants to rip into DC then I suggest that we find a new political correspondent.

Brian Tomkinson, Bolton - they read and sound like typical Commons banter.

And Blair once again tour him a new one.

Brian No4,you dont quite get it do you? your man Cameron took a hell of a political beating today,behind the scenes, the tory back benchers will again be plotting.Somethings never change !!!!!

Nick
I fear you have become a New Labour apologist. Less listening to NuLab spin and more incisive commentary please.
The day of the queens speech and you lead on Blair "Bashing" Cameron.
How about the ludicrous legislative programme, most of which is a positioning exercise to enable Blair to attack the Tories. How does this deal with the profound issues around the environment and terrorism that face us? It's apalling and provides yet more evidence of a failed and discredited government.

Nick,
In the parliamentary bubble it may have been exciting for you guys, but don't forget the working population just don't give a fig about such trivial point scoring. Right or wrong, the British public all like an underdog and watching the voting on something like The X Factor confirms this; if a contestant gets a mauling from the judges, out rolls the sympathy vote. Blair and grinning Brown would do well to heed this...

Chilish remarks?

Parliamentary scuffles are always childish, and always have been to a certain extent.

Cameron will no doubt score plenty of childishly effective hits on Brown in the near future.

He'd better, for his sake.

I notice Nick Robinson made no mention of David Cameron various jibes at Gordon Brown, i.e the comparison with a 'sociopath'. Is this not a "trivial or an unduly personal attack"?

I guess this will not be a very popular view on a 91Èȱ¬ blog or messageboard: but I thought Tony Blair did very well today. As for the Queen's speech is has some flaws, but has any Government ever produced a perfect legislative program?

Cameron's Tories are not exactly bursting with bright idea's. Apart from the climate change bill which came from Green pressure groups, what exactly is there alternative Queen's Speech?

In my view the economy is doing well despite what some newspapers say (we are not a 3rd world country) or back in the 1970's. So why put are trust in policy lite Tories?

"I may be going out but, on that performance, he's not coming in" - Tony and Gordon should take time out from their chummy 'love-in', in the vacuum they inhabit separate from the real world and start listening to the electorate. A glance at some of the comments on Have Your Say would be a good place to start - that would soon wipe the grin off their collective faces as they see how much the public now loathe them and their dreadful policies.

Their time is coming to an end.

I was always taught that ad hominem attacks was a sure sign that all plausible arguments had been exhausted.

Perhaps Tony should steel himself to meet the 27,000 who lost their jobs last month, bringing the (falsified) count to a seven year high.

No wonder Tony is beaming, he can bale-out knowing that wheels are coming off just as Gordon gets into the driver's seat.

Labour's not working. Again.

Blair bowed out of his last Queens Speech with a lame duck programme for his lame duck administration. Something else for him to fail to follow up on. When he said 'If Labour can't win against a Cameron led Tory Party in the next election, they don't deserve to be in politics' he should have added that it can't and they don't.

Agree with the former poster Nick. The joke of it is, the most senior presenters of the 91Èȱ¬ recently admitted that the 91Èȱ¬ is a complete government apologist - when the government is Labour, that is.

I would complain again, if it wasn't the fact that the 91Èȱ¬ don't even realise they do it - or are so arrogant that they can't change.

Strong economy, massive investment in the NHS, never had so much so cheap at the shops, jobs galore - and now he pastes Cameron in the House. Never mid yo Blair GO BLAIR!!!!!!.

I think Blair came across as a bit of a desperate figure his voice took on a bit of a Kevin the teenager, "I hate you" type of tone when attacking Cameron. Undoubtedly Fantasist Tony thinks he is having a rotten time of it with those nasty cash for peerages questions and the ungrateful public and I think that all came out in attacking Cameron. Mind you it has to be said Cameron should not act as if he respects Blair because if he does he is alone, and if Blair does attack him it is not wise to act sulky like Gordon does, speaking of which if Gordon is the heavyweight then I am reminded of the end of Rocky 3. I can just see Gordon now with loads of Gold chains round his neck(probably our gold) stomping around going "shut up fool" while Cameron pounds him. Actually can that be arranged for the next Queen's speech.

I saw the Queen's Speech Debate and I thought Cameron's speech tore the Labour Party to shreds - but only for about 5 seconds until Blair started speaking! I didn't think much was gained from today's debate apart from finding a use for John Prescott at last; the Labour party wants a heavyweight with a "big clinking fist" to knock out Cameron, well we all know about Prescott's fist experience.

I'm 19 and find myself undecided on whom I would vote for in a general election. For all of Blair's fitesse for pulic swabbling I don't believe his boxing prediction has any merit until I see Cameron and Brown "get it on in the ring!"

DC never taken a tough decision? Most of his leadership has been spent arguing for increasing taxes to fight climate change, a position that is grossly unpopular and viewed cynically by the electorate. It is however, a vital step, and it Cameron seems to be the only senior politician really willing to take the toughest decision of them all.

Tony Blair has proved himself to be true statesman and has had to make many tough decisions during his time as PM.

Not all the new policies, laws and legislation introduced from 1997 when new labour came to power have been popular but can the Tories under David Cameron really do any better.

The economy is sound with low interest rates. The property market is booming and unemployment levels are at all time lows even taking into account the large influx of different nationalities from the EU.

This Government has had to contend with the realities of Global terrorism which is the biggest threat to this Country's security since the Second World War.

Only time will tell but I think that David has a long way to go before he can beat Goliath.

Nick,
You're so predictable. You regard one "decent" performance at PMQs as indicative of future results.
When will you and the rest of the Westminster in-crowd realise that no-one watches the Commons and it counts for nothing?
Cameron seems to be floating some new ideas. He's forced the government into taking on the green agenda.
The next election will not be decided on a crass one-liner on the floor of the house.
It will be decided on policies.
Nick, I think you're an intelligent man. I wish you lived in the same world as the rest of us.

Sorry Nick, but despite what you and the others say about Blair's performances in the House of Commons, to the general public Blair comes across as something of a nutter and a lunatic when he goes into his aggressive and evasive mode. People do not buy what he says any more, especially when all he does these days is try and blame the Opposition for everything.

I think the boo-ing of Brown last night as he tried to be "trendy" giving an award to the youthful looking 150 old Beatle producer, says 100% more than any old rubbish that the Bliar in chief spouts.

Shouldn't you be updating us on the corruption enquiry, Nick?

Hi Nick,

GB in the red corner, DC in the blue? No contest. Tony Blair is a consummate politician, but even he has found it tough to 'front' Gordon Brown. What chance has David Cameron?

Well Blair's performance was somewhere near his old self; petulant, self-righteous, incredibly immature but brilliant nonetheless. It was an eerily similar performance to those he made when in opposition, fitting really as that's what he's been reduced to. Will it affect Cameron? Not really. Blair can win every Commons tussle he likes until he leaves. Instead, judge the Tory leader on how he faces Brown, a man with none of the verbal dexterity and spontaneity that Blair posseses.

Is this another example of the West Wing affecting politics in this country? I direct you to Toby's words to the Pres. Bartlet when discussing how to win Bartlet's re-election against the show's Bush substitute 'Gov. Ritchie':

"Then make this election about smart, and not... Make it about engaged, and not. Qualified, and not. Make it about a heavyweight. You’re a heavyweight."

I don't think the debate today in Parliament will influence the next election.

Labour have much to be proud of, but still hark on about what it was like under Major/Thatcher - a sign they know they are failing to get their message across...

Alot of people see that their tax has gone up (and are reasonably happy about that) but aren't seeing the payback... What they are afraid of is that Brown will raise tax, in totality, even more. If he does, he will be punished for it; irrespective of the wider economic situation.

If Labour want to hold on, they need to prove they can spend the money they already get wisely before asking for more.

Nick
William Hague was amazing at PMQs and that did not get him elected. Frankly I am sick of the "point scoring" and rough and tumble knock about - it distracts from the main issue.... Did Blair give Peerages for Cash - was he corrupt and why isnt the 91Èȱ¬ screaming from the rooftops about it, rather than trying to distract us with nonsense like this...
C

Surely we're missing the point. By saying that Cameron was going to face the clunking fist of a heavyweight Blair was clearly endorsing John Prescott as his successor!

Big hitter?

Does anyone remember the rumble in the jungle?

Float like a butterfly, sting like a bee.

Rope that dope.

This makes politics interesting.

Perhaps Cameron should box Gorden for the leadership?

Like many others you simply missed the point.

Cameron was very gracious to Blair on the occasion of his last Queen's speech, indeed, admitting ironically, that Blair would be missed.

However Blair showed a lack of graciousness in return. Aggression in the face of personal kindness is a sign of weakness. I don't think that he will be that fortunate the next time.

Blair's aggression in the Commons is the same aggression he has displayed - on our behalf allegedly - in the Middle East.

That aggression has made him complicit in the deaths of 655,000 Iraqis.

He's got an appalling track record - this must not be forgotten when he barks loudly.

Every dog gets one bite - he's had his and should be put down.

Nick we will be voting on the record. Just in case you haven't met any real voters lately, we won't be voting Labour.

They couldn't run a chip shop in Oldham.

I love parliamentary debate and knockabout as much as anyone, as long as it is based upon wit and intellect, Blair's performance had none of this. It was a playground "my dad can fight your dad" childish outburst, indicative of Blair's immaturity. How he has even got the nerve to show his face in parliament now that it is abundantly clear that his only legacy will be as an instigator of one of the biggest crimes in modern history, amazes me.

Mind you, he is in good company, you don't need to go to some of our towns and cities to find yobs and bullies, with a few notable exceptions, parliament is full of them.

Despite their perceived learning and education, most MPs failed to show integrity and independent thought when they voted to support Blair in our illegal attack on Iraq. To hear them even now saying that they still stand by their decision to vote for the invasion but it was "just the aftermath that went wrong" is sickening.

Those eloquent yobs in parliament are Blair's accomplices in the deaths of hundreds of thousands of innocent people.

Message 25#

So which 'green taxes' is David Cameron saying is going to put up? I must have missed that at the Tory conference? All I herd was some vague committment that he might increase the cost of flying but offset that by decreasing taxes on families. He always cautions his remarks, one get's the impression that any green tax increase will be rather small. If you compare this to the Lib Dems they have taken the very unpopular decision of proposing costed 'green taxes' worth over £9 billion - that's "tough decision" in my book. If David Cameron is really Green does he support a similar green tax program? does he support nuclear power? Or will he simply hide behind a climate change bill, which was drawn up by various Green pressure groups. Perhaps once answers those questions, he might explain his NHS policy.

A pointless speech from a pointless government. Bliar is the consumate performer without doubt, how else could he look himself in the mirror every morning. The very fact that he can mention a fourth term shows how deluded he is. The next general election is already lost for Labour thanks to Bliar/Brown.

I think the point about yesterday's performance by TB was that nowadays he rarely gets to land a punch on DC so when he does, it's a big deal. DC's not stupid - he'll find a way of rebounding and landing his own punch. After all, they were both educated at the same university. And any talk of the Tories plotting against DC after that is ludicrous.

I didn't listen to the speech, but assume from the subsequent comment and the fact that Tony's a pretty straight guy, that he actually named Gordon Brown as this mysterious heavyweight. Did he?

Yes, Blair gave Cameron an absolute pasting. Wonderful, even if I do think Blair should have quit years ago!

But does anyone seriously think that Brown would have been able to pull that off? He may be the 'man of substance' (or the 'clunking fist'), but does anyone, even Brown supporters, seriously think that Brown has the verbal dexterity and the personality to rip Cameron apart similarly?! Cameron must really be relieved that he will be facing Brown, and not Blair, at the next election!

That exchange was kind of Punch without the Judy politics.

Nick, do you think we might be in for a 'long campaign of attrition,' where our elected administrators, and those aspiring to be, spend a lot of time, and shed loads of cash, on being very rude about each other? The best form of defence being attack and all that what what...

So, the whole burden of comment is about whether Blair managed to pummel Cameron. Really? Is this what politics has come to - a bloodless spectator sport?

That's a measure of the mediocrity of our 'Leader'. A man who has spent his lengthy time in office delivering superficial and irrelevant answers, cheap political points, snake oil.

Everyone recognises that Blair has managed, almost single-handedly, to destroy the credibility of our political system. Yes, the Conservatives did get thrown out on the basis of 'sleaze'. But now Blair has mired himself and his cohorts in even worse 'sleaze'. What is the public to do? Where do we find honour, decency, justice?

That will remain Blair's Legacy. He will not be remembered for any good that he may have done (if indeed there be any) but his name will certainly be a watchword for mendacity.

Even now Labour MPs rush to distance themselves from 'New' Labour. What will they now call their party, 'Old Labour', 'New Improved Labour', 'New Labour with Added Brightness'?

I, too, thought Blair's performance smacked of desperation - wild-eyed, looking left and right to his back benchers and finger pointing (has he forgotten to hold his glasses to stop that?).

No Nick, I saw it all very differently from you.

"Parliamentary knock-about makes and breaks reputations."

Didn't do much for Hague outside the Westminster village though, did it? Despite him having Blair, to use the PM's analogy, punch drunk and on the mat week in, week out.

Heavyweight contender? Knocking out opponents?

Surely a clear sign Tony Blair is supporting a leadership attempt by John "2 Jabs" Prescott!

I think david Cameron should give up and the Conservative Party should do the decent thing and bring on Number 5.

There isn't any opposition anymore, it's just a humiliation and it's painful for me to witness a once great political party reduced to tatters.

I cry each Wednesday in antic..the prospect of seeing such a mauling by Britain's greatest Prime Minister since the war.

I think the Conservative Party should think very carefully before they choose Number 5. We've had a drone, a loony, a clown,a vampire and now we have someone best suited to being strapped to a fence on greenham common along with his windmill and solar panel politics.

In short, the Conservatives need a person to lead them that knows a thing or two about politics. They need someone like Daniel Craig (shaken,not stirred) who will defuse bombs, jump out of aeroplanes and rescue Great Britain PLC in times of stress and mortal danger.

what they don't want is this current lot that would best be suited to starring in 'loony tunes'

Th..th..th..that's all f..f..folks.

Gary

To borrow George Bush's word, David Cameron got a thumping. Its a wake up call for David. Politics is about decisions not sitting on the fence!

Nick

Remind me when did Blair make his mind up about nuclear power?
How long has he prevaricated on the issue?
I hold no brief for Cameron, just another PR man in my book.
In the mean time the power supply crisis looms, when are they (collectively) going to wake up?

Nick, I've got to say I heard the whole thing and I'm getting really weary of your pro-Labour stance. You really are coming over as a pro-Labour apologist at the moment.

yours, a floating voter who is weary of Labour and it's chief political corrrespondent in the 91Èȱ¬.

p.s. bet you won't post this up now, but I'm not alone.

I think the "big clonking fist", and that’s from Charles Clarke Knocking out GB, with the words, Control freak, physiological flaws, deluded etc. Those words will be at the forefront of any future conservative attack and how can GB withstand that??? After all if he can’t work with people how can he work with us the electorate!

All this talk about hitting Cameron, fists & heavyweights, surely there is a Labour introduced Law to cover this sort of language & Tone should get an ASBO. I thought Tone was refering to John Prescott being the heavyweight as he has form for fighting in public - among other things!

It goes to show you what an absolute mess the UK is in when the leaders of the two main opposition parties can`t get Blair after all the things he has done and NOT done. It say`s nothing about them as leaders except that they are more afraid of there own parties then they are of Blair. Cameron is the flyweight that is dancing around the ring but the opponite he is up against is not a future labour leader but his own extreme right wing agenda that must be kept from us the people.That Nick is why you can`t pin Cameron down on policy and what leaves him open to Blairs attacks.

Rather a lot of frustrated Tories on this thread methinks. About time someone gave the vacuous nonentity that is Cameron a good kicking. Good on you TB. Lightweight is a kind way of refering to the current ex-leader of the Tory party and although there is something of the schoolyard about these encounters, that kind of taunt really hit home. I for one will miss Blair when he is gone and I think a lot of other people will as well although they don't know it yet.

Blair has made mistakes. But he's had the testicular fortitude to try.

With a vacuum of policy, experience and commitment to investment in the public sector Cameron is a youthful facsimile of Blair's style and delivery, but the most significant difference is Blair had instinct, guts and ideas when he came to power and in Gordon Brown - the perfect foil.

Cameron has youth and a shallow charisma - and little else. No sorry, he has a weblog, you know to connect to the 'yoof'.

Bring that thinly veiled elitism to the inner cities of Leicester, Manchester, Liverpool, Leeds, Birmingham...

Where massive investment in schools, health and social policy - Sure Start schemes one glowing example - provide support to these deprived areas.

Taxes on Jeep Cherokees don't win prizes there.

Nick

I'm sorry but I felt that you analysis of yesterday's debate was one of your worse moments - and far from balanced.

Blair's speech was a sharp, witty and impressive attack on his opponent - but you have decided to omit the fact that Cameron's speech was itself a sharp, witty and impressive attack on the Queen's speech, which was actually the issue being debated.

Perhaps more pertinently, the point you missed making was how the third player in the story - Gordon Brown - comes out of this. Both Blair and Cameron are consummate performers who are able to launch amusing yet devastating attacks on their opponents. To date, Brown has failed to demonstrate the same skills - particularly when he strays from economic issues.

The real question that yesterday's session should have asked is who will be master of the chamber once Blair has gone. The evidence of yesterday's debate - as with many others - would suggest that it is far more likely to be Cameron than Brown.

Equally pertinent is the question raised by some of your other readers - why you chose not to comment on any of the criticism's of the speech in your own commentary. Surely this doesn't too much to avoid the accusations of "labour apologists" currently being levelled at the 91Èȱ¬.

Ben

I tend to agree with most people on here that performances at PMQ's are usually a waste of time and don't really have any influence on voters. I didn't see the exchange and let's face it Blair is going the same way as the Republican party - DC is just letting Blair play out his dirty tricks and bile and spite and will then hoover up the votes while Blair just looks desperate and juvenile

One week Cameron wins, another week Blair wins. Who cares? When set alongside the number of people that have died following the Iraq invasion, this is pretty insignificant stuff.

The entire point of this Queen's speech was to position the Conservatives as opposed to their natural values. The fact is David Cameron has been allowed to get away with murder for too long, a year in power and no policies, no news on policies and no idea what the underlying philosphy of those policies will be. Blair, and Labour, need to show thta elections are not about smiles and sunshine but about who you want to govern. The level of dissatisfaction with this Laour government is absurd, as Reagan asked in 1980 are you better off now then then then when they took over? Only a fool or a liar would disagree that the vast majority of people, the people who really needed help after years of neglect under the Conservatives, are better off.

Blair ranted at Cameron like a mad-man. Labour are so intent on this pathetic character assassination they are barely paying any attention to solving our problems, as this non-event of a Queens speech demonstrates. I'ts almost like the whole day was planned so Blair could off-load on Cameron when the TV camera's were watching...

Hmmm, a lot of comments with many following typical partisan lines. For me, and many like me, I need to be convinced I need to vote at all and that spectacle yesterday has done more to put me off. So a good leader is the one who shouts loudest or who can think of the wittiest one-liners? I think not.

As for your performance Nick, you've let yourself down big time. I once looked forward to reading your comments but that rant yesterday was pathetic. As one of the earliest comments said, you need to get away from the Westminster Village more and talk and LISTEN to real people.

I'm sure that the "Westminster Villagers" enjoyed the witty banter as much as you did.

Meanwhile, we the people are left to idly leaf through the proposed legislation. One aspect that caught my attention is the New Mental Health Act, which proposes that those with incurable personality disorders can be arbitrarily detained on the say-so of a doctor and a social-worker.

Is this wise? I mean, wouldn't being a congenital liar with delusions of grandeur constitute an incurable personality disorder? Who then in the Westminster Village would be safe?

Perhaps, like their pensions, MPs would be wise to specifically exclude themselves from the scope of this legislation.

Deflect the media from the policies by "picking" a fight with Dave, clever, and you fell for it.

It'll not matter though, where has the "heavy-weight" been during all the major political debates, strangely absent and silent, some heavy-weight. When Tony's gone it'll be more tiddly-winks than boxing on the labour end.

Sorry Nick but I'm bitterly disappointed with this commentary.
I signed in to see what you had to say about the latest on the cash for peerages scandal only to find this. You've totally avoided the very pertinent criticisms Cameron had of the policies put forward in the Queen's speech. This government has all but ruined this country and there's the promise of more to come, with our civil liberties threatened as never before. The 91Èȱ¬ has betrayed both it's own reputation and the British people by continuing to act as Labour apologists.

Did anyone notice how red David Cameron went during the bit about nuclear power stations?

Whenever I want to hear clever speech I feel quite certain that if I listen to what Tony Blair has just said I won't be disappointed. But that's all it ever is - clever speech. Empty, shallow, clever - typical lawyer. There is never any real substance.

Can't you, Nick, as a broadcaster, help to show this for what it is - just empty words - rather than praise him for winning the last round? Won't we ever get back to real politicians doing real things - or was it just the naivety of childhood that made me think it once existed long ago?

caroline and Glenn had it right.

Hague used to knock TB all over the place. Didn't get the Tories in.

If what "New" Labour have to offer is a sullen whiner who bases his reputaion for a sage pair of hands on
i) following Ken Clarke's policies from 1997-1999
ii) his one sensible act - letting the Bank of England do its own thing and
iii) personally engineering the pensions crisis

...
that may get the Tories in.

The Tories went out on a tide of corruption.

This lot? Make the Tories look like saints.

I saw it rather differently.
The Blair/Csmeron exchange was half-hearted on both sides - after all Mr.Cameron had just praised Mr.Blair.
But David Cameron's attack on Gordon Brown was of a different order. Mr.Cameron was very effective and Mr.Brown showed it.
I think Mr.Cameron had a good day and I do not think that Gordon got the endorsement some think he did.
Mr.Blair looked wild eyed, exhausted and worried.
The fight to watch is Cameron v Brown if Mr.Read lets it happen!

I admire Blair's acting ability. He can blot out thoughts of what an appalling waste of time and taxpayers' money his governments have seen through. We taxpayers, unfortunately, have to live with the real legacy of a badly damaged country. Meanwhile, the Conservatives have chosen a clown rather than a man, like Howard, with principles. Oh, dear.

I don't see how you can praise such a childish attack, not based on any kind of issue.

Its just like a school bully pushing someone around. I guess he learned about this form of childish mud slinging from the republicans.

Its the 'divert attention away from my own inadequacies by insulting the opposition with irrelevant jibes' tactic, the heart of U.S politics.

The comment above that it is what the backbenchers feel that is the real shift seems to be apposite. Talking with a local (and previously loyal to Cameron) MP and Local Constituency officials there was an air of abject depression about the Party Leader. It may be a sample of one, but it appears the 'air of animal spirits' was tipped over by Cameron's floundering display. Of equal significance was the feeling that Cameron is ready to jump in any direction on a whim. Particular umbrage seems to have been taken on the decision to vote for an immediate Iraq War Enquiry at the last minute. (Quentin Davies is apparently not the only MP who doesn't like the volte-face, and the substance of the policy.) The rot has set in, again. There has been no effective opposition to Tony Blair in the period he has been Prime Minister. That as much as anything is responsible for the government by diktat. It is a tragedy. A continuing one.

Tut.. tut... tut.

Oh how frustrated you Tories actually are. Shoot the 91Èȱ¬ messenger and the truth will go away.

Remeber this, Dave spends days performing in front of his mirror, rehearsing his avalanche of personal insults for Tony, our beloved Prime Minister.

In a flash, and therefore totally unrehearsed,our dear leader slaughters him with a devastating and witty reply.

The flip flopping unpatriotic Tories are a shadow of their once pitiful self and have no chance of a return with such withering and futile attacks.

Tony is going soon and in his own time. I'm missing him already.

It's a joy to watch.

PS. TIP: Attack Tony, not Nick. Nick ain't the Prime Minister. Duh!
Gary

So if "Parliamentary knock-about makes and breaks reputations", then I assume that William Hague is actually now the Prime Minister. Funny we missed that. He certainly used regularly to massacre Blair in the Commons and was a far better performer, as was Michael Howard. I am sure that Nick Robinson, being so clearly enamoured of Blair's Labour, did not give them the same credit.

Mr Robinson, surely someone like you, aspiring to be a journalist, should be commenting on the paucity of Blair's arguments rather than the high quality of his desperate insults? The fact that Cameron was right, in that in 10 years Blair has been unable improve life in this country (and has done a lot to damage it) does not seem newsworthy to you.

All these playground "punchups" just hide the real problem. Having listened to PMQs today I was reminded that Blair is the consummate "spinner". When asked whether he thought it right that Londoners should pay for the Olympics budget overrun he just said how great the Olympics will be for Britain. Many people agree with that but that wasn't the question!
Nothing new there then, I can't remember when Blair last answered a question with a straight answer.
So Blair's Queen's Speech statement was a tour de force. Who cares? Cameron was right. Blair's government is discredited and no-one believes a word he says anymore.