A silly question and a misleading answer
The MP for Copeland asked what looked like a planted question at Prime Minister's Question Time today. Both question and answer were misleading.
The question began with the statement that the Prime Minister is the only leader of a British political party who supports Nuclear New Build.
This is not true - David Cameron has said that he sees nuclear new build as having a role to play within a balanced energy policy.
The Prime Minister's reply started well, saying that he hopes all parties will support nuclear new build. Thus far I agreed with him.
But then he quoted the time - eight minutes past twelve - and suggested that as he understands it the current Conservative policy is that nuclear new build is a last resort.
That isn't the current policy - that form of words was dropped three or four years ago. Shadow Secretary of State Greg Clark has made clear that we want to see new nuclear build.
And incidentally, though the question looked like a plant the Prime Minister didn't even answer it. He responded to the point scoring which came before the question but his answer did not contain any specific mention of changes to the planning system, which the actual question was nominally about.
This sort of casual distortion of the policies of the Opposition in support of childish party-political knockabout is not in the interests of the nuclear industry or of employment in Copeland. If you want to encourage investment in nuclear new build you will not help to get it by undermining the pro-nuclear consensus.
The question began with the statement that the Prime Minister is the only leader of a British political party who supports Nuclear New Build.
This is not true - David Cameron has said that he sees nuclear new build as having a role to play within a balanced energy policy.
The Prime Minister's reply started well, saying that he hopes all parties will support nuclear new build. Thus far I agreed with him.
But then he quoted the time - eight minutes past twelve - and suggested that as he understands it the current Conservative policy is that nuclear new build is a last resort.
That isn't the current policy - that form of words was dropped three or four years ago. Shadow Secretary of State Greg Clark has made clear that we want to see new nuclear build.
And incidentally, though the question looked like a plant the Prime Minister didn't even answer it. He responded to the point scoring which came before the question but his answer did not contain any specific mention of changes to the planning system, which the actual question was nominally about.
This sort of casual distortion of the policies of the Opposition in support of childish party-political knockabout is not in the interests of the nuclear industry or of employment in Copeland. If you want to encourage investment in nuclear new build you will not help to get it by undermining the pro-nuclear consensus.
Comments
This rubbish has been going on for years. It establishes nothing, it proves nothing, PMQs are a total waste of time.
How many times must David Cameron repeat himself. Poor DC must be going blue in the face. No wonder he needs an airbrush! He has said on numerous occasions that nuclear is part of the mixed energy policy. Greg Clarke has endorsed this policy, in his visit to Sellafield last February, assuring workers and trade union officials at the plant that there will be continuity. Mr Hendry and Mr Clarke have pledged to speed up the planning process.
Most sensible people across parties recognise that the energy crisis has to be tackled collectively for the good of the nation. Much of the debate has been constructive, minus the Jamie Reed intervention during Greg Clarke's speech. Incidentally it was noted that Mr Reed was not permitted to continue, so anything useful he had to say thereafter that ridiculous statement, did not get aired. Equating David Cameron with a war traitor, in December, was just outright offensive.
I would share Mr Reed's amusement at this playground politics, which he boasts about on his blog, if I did not have any concern for the consequences for the area in which I live and the future of its investment. He is exceedingly foolish to bite the hand that will feed him.
Tim - are you the PB.com Tim, btw? - the fact that all parties use planted questions, and say things their opponents consider misleading does not make it naive for those opponents to point out when it is done that badly, or to correct such blatant misrepresentation of their position.