Kemi Badenoch is bad at PMQs. Again

Badenoch’s ineptitude at PMQs is bewildering, particularly because her pugilistic manner was what lent her the support of many MPs in the first place. But, while her choice of topics has narrowed in the past couple of weeks, replacing the scattershot approach of previous appearances, her inability to land blows on a PM with a current approval rating of -42 is mindblowing.

Starmer began by lining up a planted question from a stooge backbencher, Damien Egan, about not means-testing the triple lock, something which Badenoch has mused about doing despite the fact that it makes no sense given more than three seconds’ thought. “The difference between us is that they would cut pensions and we are increasing them!” cheered Starmer.

Then Badenoch went in on Labour’s employment bill, or ‘unemployment bill’ as she has dubbed it (amirite???) via an attack on Starmer’s broader economic record and a cheeky boast of what a legacy the Tories had bequeathed him (“When the Conservatives left office, we had the fastest economic growth in the G7”). Starmer responded with some sort-of statistics showing his policies were succeeding.

Then Badenoch blew it, twice, in the space of one question. “The prime minister does not want to talk about the employment bill because he does not know about it,” she said. “Last week he misled the House. He was not on top of his own education bill…”

This was a double whammy. Firstly, the initial sentence makes no sense. The prime minister does not want to talk about the employment bill because he does not know about it? What is she insinuating here? That Angela Rayner sneaked it on to an order paper on one of Starmer’s frequent trips abroad and the entire House of Commons was complicit in keeping it from him? What did she mean?

The second, and more serious, was that accusing anyone of misleading the House is a parliamentary no-no and one speaker Lindsay Hoyle takes seriously on the brief moments he isn’t thinking about how he can get on the telly more. “Order!”, he roared. “We cannot accuse the prime minister of misleading the House! (At this point, somebody shouted ‘but he did!’). We cannot do it. I am sure there are words that the leader of the opposition would prefer to use.”

It did not improve. Badenoch spelled out how Labour’s workers’ rights bill would destroy growth (last week a woman in Exeter had told her so). Starmer boasted of what his government was doing including, apparently, redeveloping the home of one of the planet’s richest football clubs. 

Badenoch described the employment bill as an “adventure playground for lawyers” and redeployed the line about Starmer needing “to stop being a lawyer and start being a leader”, allowing Starmer to dig into his Topical Jokes from 2022 book and say “We know she is not a lawyer, she is clearly not a leader, and if she keeps on like this, she is going to be the next lettuce!”. Arf! Tell the one about the MP looking at tractor porn!

Elsewhere, there was a rare mention of relations with the EU, Lib Dem Ed Davey having made a speech on rejoining its customs union recently and discovering – who’d have thought? – that it had gone down very well with the sort of people who might be inclined to vote Lib Dem.

“If the prime minister will not change his mind today on a customs union, will he confirm to the House that when he goes to Brussels on Monday he will open negotiations for the UK to join the pan-Euro-Mediterranean convention so that we can start removing the growth-damaging trade barriers set up by the Conservatives?” asked the bungee-botherer.

“We have clear red lines when it comes to the single market and the customs union,” said Starmer, which eagle-eyed readers will note is not an answer to the actual question posed. 

Finally, it’s interesting just how little back-up Badenoch gets from the troops behind her, once again only two Conservative MPs having questions (half the number Lib Dem backbenchers posed). One, Jeremy Wright – a nailed-on Pointless answer in Theresa May’s cabinet – asked about Covid vaccines, for those for whom Liz Truss wasn’t a deep enough cut.

And then finally, Andrew Rosindell, a particularly swivel-eyed Tory backbencher representing Romford, rose to ask about immigration. “The population of this country will rise to 72.5 million by 2032 – that is 500,000 people a year, which is unsustainable. Who voted for that, and will the government do something to ensure that the population of this country is sustainable going forward?” he demanded.

“I think the honourable gentleman should talk to his party leader,” responded Starmer. “Net migration went through the roof under the previous government – by nearly one million; it quadrupled. And who was cheering it on? The leader of the opposition.”

Poor Kemi! At least in her defence she could say she did not know about it.