Think PMQs is outdated, unprofessional and needs to change? Mumsnet petition this way.

[JustineMumsnet]

Hi all

Following on from our survey into the UK's political culture and the subsequent webchat with the women MPs from the three main parties, one issue that came up repeatedly was Prime Minister's Questions. While 61% of you felt that they offered an opportunity for MPs to hold the government to account, only 13% of you thought they weekly sessions were actually effective. 76% of you thought they were unprofessional and outdated, and half of you (50%) believed they actually damaged Parliament's reputation. As CalamitouslyWrong put it: "[we] might as well get some preschoolers to call each other poo-heads and be done with it."

David Cameron said he was "fed up with the Punch and Judy politics of Westminster" wanting to change "the name calling, backbiting, point scoring, finger pointing" and Prime Ministers can change PMQs unilaterally - Tony Blair went from 2 sessions a week, to one longer session in 1997. So we think he should fulfil his promise and look at the the process of PMQs now.

So we’ve launched a petition asking David Cameron to give this huge Parliamentary showcase a refresh.

The Hansard Society has proposed a a few changes to the format, including rapid-fire Q&As, more open questions, taking questions directly from voters via social media, and penalties for MPs who behave badly. And we're asking for David Cameron to pilot these changes and so improve the way parliament works.

Hope you can sign up and, as always, if you want to make some noise about this on social media, that would be fantastic.

Justine

I agree that there is bad behaviour from all parties, except for UKIP who are not yet represened in the Chambers.

'Think the layout of chamber makes things worse.'

"Interestingly, in 1943 MPs shunned the chance to redesign the chamber after the old one was bombed during the war, opting instead to replicate the confined conditions they’d become accustomed to. Churchill told MPs that the old layout was responsible for Britain’s two-party system, which he described as “the bedrock of British parliamentary democracy”. This is why today the Commons chamber has just 427 seats for 650 members. As Churchill observed: “We shape our buildings, and afterwards, our buildings shape us.”

www.totalpolitics.com/print/153702/pmqs-exclusive-interviews-with-pm-miliband-and-clegg.thtml

It is the layout that makes it intense and like a bear pit. It is the layout that makes sparks fly and enables the public to judge character under pressure. I am glad they did no redesign the building after the war, because Churchill is right that the building shapes the participants in the bear pit drama that the public tune in for every week.

It is in the bear pit amidst the heckling, the roaring, the cheering and the jeering that the public gets to see what lies behind the cool mask.

It is intense because it is important, it is packed out with standing room only because it is important. Blair "feared" it and Thatcher's legs were "shaking" because it is important. There is nothing quite like it. Let's not ruin it and give the political class a free pass. Let's watch the spectacle and see them make mistakes, stumble and fall on their ass.

PMQs: Ed turns Cameron red with rage

"PMQs: Ed turns Cameron red with rage"
"The Labour leader got the best of today's exchanges on the economy and the...

You could read everything you needed to know about Ed Miliband’s PMQs performance on David Cameron’s face. By the sixth question, the prime minister was glowing red and roaring about how “he didn’t shirk his responsibilities”. There could be no doubt that the Labour leader had bested him."

www.totalpolitics.com/print/317187/pmqs-ed-turns-cameron-red-with-rage.thtml

"Labour leader Ed Miliband declared yesterday that the Prime Minister’s face had turned “as red as a postbox” as he struggled to defend the Royal Mail privatisation fiasco."

www.morningstaronline.co.uk/a-ce25-David-Cameron-red-as-a-postbox-over-Royal-Mail-sell-off-shambles/#.U66DrKJOWic

I think it's an unvarnished arena where politicians are held to account away from the usual spin. I don't care about the heckling. I think it's a stupid thing to focus a MN campaign on and I'm incensed at the way Justine is manufacturing an 'MN opinion' in order to serve her own profile building as a lobbyist.

Who knows how many other 'MN opinions' will get manufactured in the service of, say, Nestlé or Procter & Gamble if this one works out and she proves the 'MN Campaign' mechanism is an effective way of making government listen? Perhaps you think I'm cynical; I do think MN is a force for good in many ways but it's a business first and foremost and that business is increasingly about product testing, customer surveys and lobbying.

they are good shouting matching but not much else.

PMQs should change - and the main way is that Bercow should shut up. Another is that it should be on twice a week.

Other than that, PMQs is fantastic. It tests the mettle of a Prime Minister in a way which nothing else can.

I'm not surprised at the MN petition frankly; though it's rather disgraceful that this is masquerading as an honest survey. It's the personal agenda of a few Guardian reading bien-pensants being presented as the genuine voice of the people.

In reality, the voice of the people is very easy to determine via their remote controls and radio sets. PMQs is the most watched/heard Parliamentary debate by a long way; other appearances with the PM such as select committee hearings fall far behind. They give very little sense of conviction, they don't deliver any meaningful sense of politics as being anything other than managerial.

PMQs is the envy of Parliaments around the world. This petition is a farce and the way it has been handled by MN doesn't do them any credit whatsoever.

FFS I can't stand it when passionate debate is not seen as 'professional' as long as they are not using foul mouthed expletives or physically slugging it out then PMQs should remain as they are. Agree Mumsnet HQ should wind its neck in instead of trying to cheer lead for the Labour party

meant to say "passionate debate is seen as unprofessional"

Urgh. I really hate this petition. Justine can you tell us what percentage of mumsnet users actually filled in the survey from which you are drawing your 84% stat?

Mumzy, have you seen anyone objecting to "passionate debate?" If so, please show me where.

What I object to is tribes of hooligans baying at each other like animals. And representatives of us, the citizens, trading schoolboy insults.

Don't you?

It is not all schoolboy insults though. I agree there is a fair bit of baying. Again, how often do you watch the WHOLE THING? No one who is in agreement with the petition has answered my question yet! I feel that if you only watch the bits on the news everyday then you are getting a skewed version of what happens.

Also it must be noted that is gets double the viewing figures of any other type of political discussion event, so it seems that it is truly representative of what people think of it, rather than a focus study group opinion.

I really do not see " tribes of hooligans" during PMQs I see passionate debate where politicians hold each other to account and therefore a very healthy thing for our democracy.
You want to see tribes of politicians acting like hooligans try watching

With so much wrong with British politics, I'm puzzled as to why you've decided to focus your attention on this. Call me out of touch but I'll be honest and say I didn't even know PMQs existed before this campaign raised it (in my defence, I've only lived in the UK for 10 years). There are constant pictures on Facebook posted by special interest groups showing how empty Parliament is (maybe 5 MPs in session) when welfare reforms or disability benefits are being discussed, and a full house for the debate on MP's expenses. Now those images may not be real (I actually hope they're fake, it was so disgusting).

But how about instead of focussing on one 30-minute session that happens once a week, we push for MPs to actually bother showing up at work on a daily basis, being in Parliament when the livelihoods of vulnerable people are being decided?

Annie most of the work of the Commons and Lords takes place in the committees rather than in the chamber. The debates in the chamber are mainly preludes to the votes so it doesn't actually matter too much more than for the look of the thing how many are in the chamber for them - the MPs will still be in Parliament and will respond to the division bell to go and vote. Where the detail of bills is thrashed out is largely in the committees, and those aren't that visible in media coverage. If it's a particularly contentious bill then MPs will seek to bring amendments on the floor of the house and that's when you tend to get more people present to debate. Most committee sessions are held in the mornings, which is why the chamber doesn't sit until the afternoon, but MPs will continue having meetings with constituency groups, special interest groups, etc in the afternoons as well, which is probably a better use of their time than sitting in the chamber not doing a lot.

There have been many excellent debates over the years, and personally I think PMQs is absolutely fine the way it is. For one thing, it really shows the mettle of the party leaders. Look at this week's, for example. Miliband had the widest of open goals to inflict damage on Cameron - Andy Coulson being found guilty - and he still managed to fluff it.

Hang on, why do MUMSNET care so much about limiting PMQs?

It's an opportunity to have a go at Cameron , which can only be a great thing.

Please don't think it's a good idea to allow Cameron to let himself off the hook.

Also, why is it any of mumsnets business.

The only think I would back is be stricter about being sexist.

Why is MUMSNET politically lobbying in Cameron's favour...that's the LAST thing we want.

Not being sexist obv.

Has the membership of Mumsnet ever been surveyed to see what issues they want 'Mumsnet' to campaign on?

I know 38degrees, which is a campaigning body, ask their members what their priorities for campaigns are. Can't remember being asked on here though.

Reform of PMQ is a Labour election policy promise. Although they don't know HOW.

Miscarriage care...good, fine , carry on.

Ill thought through political lobbying riding off the popularity of the well known website previously known to be taken note of by the press and political leaders...not on

Don't use us in a way we don't know we are being used because I certainly don't back PMQS reform and although members may have answered in a certain way to the questionnaire,(? Did they know their responses would be used in this way ) that does not give the green light to lobby for this change in our name.

Justine , answering a bland questionnaire is one thing...using that to alter a very important part of our political process is myopic and unacceptable.

Cameron would bite your arm off to get out of answering uncomfortable questions about why he is ruining the NHS

Are we to take it that MUMSNET is Tory ... ? Are they anti NHS. ?

if so I'm out and we should start an anti petition.

Mumsnet aren't Tory, they are Labour.
But Labour, the LibDems, the Tories and the metropolitan elite are "all in it together". They all want an easier time of it. They don't want tough, beastly questioning and scrutiny for the long term.

"The last word – a compelling endorsement – can be left to Tony Blair. He described PMQs as "the most nerve-racking, discombobulating, nail-biting, bowel-moving, terror-inspiring, courage-draining experience" of his career. If this is the means by which our representatives can make the powerful squirm, then long may it continue."

www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2014/feb/27/three-cheers-pmqs-ugly-prime-ministers-questions

"Tony Blair scrapped the 36-year-old twice-weekly PMQ convention in favour of one fixed session of half an hour each Wednesday, which Robin Cook, as leader of the House, brought forward to the midday slot it occupies today. In his memoirs, Blair explains that his reformation of PMQs was made with the “physical and mental” strains of a twice-weekly showdown in mind: “I never regretted that decision, and subsequent prime ministers will thank me for it.”

www.totalpolitics.com/print/153702/pmqs-exclusive-interviews-with-pm-miliband-and-clegg.thtml

They want to change PMQs for "our own good", the usual way that they always care about us and have us in mind and not themselves.

They say PMQs is outdated, it is what they call "unprofessional" and contributes to the public's low estimation of politicians.

They are all "modernisers" - Labour, the LibDems and the metropolitan elite, just like the Tory "modernisers" and Blair, the "moderniser". PMQs is outdated and not fit for "modernisers" and "modern", unbeastly, dumbed-down times.

They want it changed, sanitised, polished up and tamed down. Then it will no longer hold any fear for Blair et al. It will no longer be "the most nerve-racking, discombobulating, nail-biting, bowel-moving, terror-inspiring, courage-draining experience" of his career or of anyone else's career.

And the public won't watch it anymore and will go back to sleep beause the "modernisers" have ripped the guts out of our only opportunity to see them questioned under pressure and held to account in full media spotlight.

@Givealittlerespect

Justine , answering a bland questionnaire is one thing...using that to alter a very important part of our political process is myopic and unacceptable.

Cameron would bite your arm off to get out of answering uncomfortable questions about why he is ruining the NHS

Are we to take it that MUMSNET is Tory ... ? Are they anti NHS. ?

if so I'm out and we should start an anti petition.

But this petition is NOT about scrapping PMQs - where does it say that anywhere? - it's about making the scrutiny (which I completely agree is a good thing) more effective. As well making parliament less off-putting to the majority (and especially to women).

It should be as off putting as possible for the Tony Blairs and David Camerons

Inappropriate venture for this site

Sexist and racist behaviour should be penalised.

Women can cope with sarcasm and argument just as well as men.

'Women can cope with sarcasm and argument just as well as men.'

Absolutely. Thatcher trounced every single man they put up against her and sent them all packing with ease.