Weirdly, Keir and Kemi looked more secure in their jobs as a modicum of coherence entered their exchanges
C
redit where credit is due. The last few prime minister’s questions have been an exercise in nihilism. The embodiment of existential futility. Questions asked by Kemi Badenoch but not even a pretence by Keir Starmer of answering them. It was like the worst days of Boris Johnson’s time in No 10. We’d have learned more if both leaders had chosen to read out some names from an old 1980s phonebook.
But to everyone’s surprise – not least Starmer’s – this week Keir did make a reasonable fist of listening to Kemi’s questions and giving a reply that was more or less coherent. Well, up to a point. Obviously he didn’t answer the one question that really counted. The one about when the defence investment plan would be published. But you can’t have everything. And, to be fair, it is a tricky one. Both sides of the house know that the UK needs to spend more on defence. Especially now the US seems to have become the enemy. But no one can agree on how to pay for it.
So perhaps then it was no surprise that Starmer and the speaker appeared to have a standup row when the chamber was emptying after PMQs. Halfway through one of Keir’s replies to Kemi, Lindsay Hoyle had interrupted the prime minister to observe that it was his duty to answer questions, not to spend several minutes pointing out the limitations of the Tory party. For Starmer this had been too much. He really had been trying. This was him on best behaviour. And it had been a huge improvement on the last few weeks. Yet still the speaker had chosen to humiliate him. This felt personal. This one will run and run.
