Today we got an assignment that was a bit different to what we are used to working with. We had to pretend we were journalists present at the Question Time session of 24th of February 2010 in the House of Commons. We were supposed to write for newspapers supporting either one of the three big parties, and Camilla and I chose to represent a newspaper supporting the Labour party. We chose to focus on the rhetorical aspects and the behaviour in the heated discussions.
The discussion went red hot during Question Time in Parliament the 24th of February 2010. David Cameron's poor attempts to strip Gordon Brown’s arguments for depth were weak. Even so, we cannot say that Brown was acting flawlessly either. Important political issues were discussed. However, they almost drowned in shouting, mocking and childish behaviour.
Firstly, a small induction to the formal frames of what seemed to be a fight between childish siblings, namely Question Time. Question Time in a parliament appears when the oppositional MP's and the other MP's hear the Prime minister and the ministers out on whichever topic they would like to ask. The Prime minster and the ministers are obliged to answer the questions. Such questions also appear frequently during normal days in Parliament. However, Question Time is a period of time with the sole purpose of asking questions. Questions by the opponents are asked with the aim of both attacking the leading party, but also to influence and make them aware of certain dilemmas.
Gordon Brown elegantly introduced his presence by taking a minute to tribute the seven British soldiers who bravely sacrificed their lives in the war in Afghanistan. He also mentioned the importance of these men as they have decreased the danger of terrorism in the streets of the UK. All other speakers followed up with similar tributes. Other topics that were on the agenda of the 24th of February Question Time were cancer treatment, the economy and hospital management failure.
No matter how interesting these topics are, what merely astonished me was the similarity between a kinder garden and the hullabaloo situation in the House of Commons. The amount of noise, aggressive gestures and provoking comments made the whole thing ridiculous. At one point, it seemed more relevant to mock the opposing party, rather than performing politics. For instance, David Cameron and the Conservatives laughed harshly when Brown mentioned how the Conservatives never talk about the economy. Cameron followed this up by tauntingly claiming that Brown will "leave the country poorer than when he begun." This is a completely irrelevant argument considering the impact of the global financial crisis, which you cannot blame Brown for. Other than that, there were rude pointing, slamming and shouting coming from both parties. Eventually it all resulted in a chaos which provoked Mr. Speaker to stand up and say: "If members do not stop shouting, I may have to ring some sort of help line myself - or, worse still, suspend the sitting. This sort of noise and ranting makes an extremely bad impression on the British public. I appeal to the House to have some regard for the way in which we are viewed by the electorate."
There were big differences in how Brown and Cameron approached each other. Whilst Brown mainly focused his attention towards his fellow "labourers," as if his purpose was to get their consent, Cameron addresses his arguments to the opposing party. This shows were the focus of the politics lies, namely on the Labour's policies. Many of Cameron's arguments are irrelevant to the conservative politics. In some cases, he seems more of a comedian than a serious politician. For instance, he claims that the Prime Minister and the Chancellor are at war and states: "If they get any closer, they will start kissing." It seems like Cameron is merely trying to attack the personal Brown rather than conveying his own politics. Could this be because he lacks criticism of the Labour politics?
If you want, you can watch the filming of the Question Time 24th of February 2010 here! (Warning: It is more than 8 hours long!)
You can find the transcript here!
"Hullabaloo": This single word rocketed your post into greatness!
SvarSlettApart from that, I have to agree that British politics are a bit ridiculous, although some of the oddities and eccentricities are charming. The comparison to a kindergarten is very fitting.
Is this the newspaper article, or did I misunderstand something? Good work either way!
And Cameron does have a point about "leaving the country poorer", as Keynes' theory isn't the only way of fixing the economy. Both Hayek and Schumpeter have different solutions, and they have greater appeal to Conservative parties.
I agree with Magnus. Good work! I really liked observing you too working on this assignment. You were so focused and on task all the time. Great observations too. Nice touch about the financial crisis, still a very difficult topic to fully understand. Like how to fix the economy. And then your last point about how to best attack an opponent. By criticizing their politics or by explaining how good your own ideas are? Great work guys!
SvarSlettI found this topic very interesting to write about. Just think about how much time they spend on arguing inconstructively. In politics there are few restrictions on what elements to bring into an argument and how to build your own arguments.
SvarSlettMagnus, We watched the filming of Question Time :)