Brown questions as-it-happened
Welcome to politics.co.uk’s As-It-Happens page. Here you can keep up to date with major parliamentary debates, press conferences or news events in real time. Just hit refresh on your browser to see the latest development.
This event is now over, but you can see how it happened below. Remember to start reading from the bottom upwards.
Now Mr Brown can rest easy for another six months, before he has to come back here and ppear infront of them again. Given the government’s current status, one wonders what they’ll have to talk about then.
One can’t ask for a gripping performance from Gordon Brown at events like these, nor even for him to appear comfortable or authoritative. But he did manage to get past the occasional moment of evident hostility and the frequent interruptions without making any big mistakes. Apart from a couple of flashes of irritation, he pulled through well enough.
The meeting comes to an end, after two and a half hours.
And he changes the subject to African Union pressure, hoping the questioner will move on too. He does.
But he refuses to tell the committee he will implement a presumption of refugee status for Zimbabweans claiming asylum.
“I said I’ll look at the issues that have been raised,” the PM replies.
“Surely we could have a more positive response from you on the refugees?” Mr Brown is asked.
Nevertheless, he seems to be getting through it. His record on Mugabe is strong and it looks like he knows it, even if the refugee angle is a weak point.
He’s said that they ‘look at the individual case on its merits’ three or four times now. It sounds bad – hypocritical and uncaring – and thats the line the questioning is going towards. There is a difference of opinion over Zimbabwe after all
Mr Brown fluffs the answers, talking bureacrat-speak about judging each application on its own merits.
He’s asked if he’s uncomfortable when denouncing the Mugabe regime while forcing the citizens home.
OK this one could get tough. Mr Brown is pushed on how the UK government could even suggest Zimbabwean refugees should be forced back to their own country.
Apparantly not. Mr Brown says real progress has been made in turning African leaders against Robert Mugabe.
But his efforts on Zimbabwe are “ineffectual grandstanding”, he’s told.
Mr Brown is praised for his humanitarian efforts for Africa as chancellor.
And onto Zimbabwe. This, surely, is a subject everyone agrees on.
“We must continue with the negotiations,” Mr Brown says. One wonders what would happen if a British prime minister said of the Middle East: “We want an end to negotiations.”
He’s asked if further movement in the EU could be based on a settlement freeze.
But of course Mr Brown is not offering anything satifactory to the MPs – he just gives them more platitudes about the government’s opinion on settlements and Palestinian financial improvements. One wonders what he could possible say, to be fair. Invade Israel? Unlikely.
The irritation on the committee at continued settlement building is evident, but here, as elsewhere, its a case of people talking to an empty room. No-one who matters is listening. Mr Brown wants to talk about helping the Palestinians economically but he’s interrupted. “I need to be able to finish my answers as well,” he says.
Words do not seem to be enough, his questioner says. Even those of the US don’t have an affect, so the UK’s voice doesn’t achieve much.
Mr Brown doesn’t say so, obviously. He states his objection to the settlements.
Anyone who knows anything about the Middle East knows the answer is ‘nothing’. The UK influence on Israeli domestic policy is slim to non-existent.
A difficult line of questioning on Israeli settlements. What can the UK and EU do to stop them?
The commitment of Nato seems a bit half-hearted, he’s told.
On Afghan-Pakistan relations, Mr Brown says he’s working with both of them and the Americans to improve the situation.
The questioner’s only critical question makes Mr Brown narrow his eyes and for a second you get a feeling for how bad it would be when some civil servant becomes his enemy.
He talks about fixing up the police force, having local elections, giving people an economic stake in the area. All overwatch tasks, but important, he says.
Apparantly, no-one in the UK seems to know how much better Basra is doing. That one didn’t come from the PM, it came from a member of the committee. Rather endearingly, Mr Brown doesn’t jump on this friendly little question, but rather talks about what still has to be done.
Discussion moves onto Iraq, where Mr Brown says there has been “substantial progress” in Basra.
“You work with those countries where you can do so,” he says. He wants reform to the UN, but he also wants to strengthen it. Typically for a British prime minister, it does sound like a half-European and half-American perspective.
You can’t help but feel Mr Brown is a genuine multilateralist. Everything he says on international affairs involves bringing a lengthy list of countries round the table
Questions now move to international affairs, never Mr Brown’s strong point.
Mr Brown says his new points system deals with the problem the questioner raises.
A questioner calls on Mr Brown to have a moratorium on unskilled immigrants.
One interrogator calls Mr Brown chancellor twice. Fair enough this time last year, we were all doing it, but you feel it’s about time he got that one right.
Mr Brown defends his environmental policy. He says the UK is a world leader is searching out new methods of energy, and that no government has invested more in public transport.
He says we need to “continue to monitor” what goes on in the private sector. That’s a good way of doing nothing while making it clear you might someday do something.
The equal pay gap. The equality bill was fairly weak on taking action in the private sector, Mr Brown is told.
Mr Brown wants to tinker with housing benefit to make it easier to return to work. On incapacity benefits it’s all about extra training or advice so they can get back into work.
A new hand gesture! The open palm, in a sort of revealing, here-you-are movement. Again, I have no idea what it’s trying to communicate. Again, it bears no resemblence to the words.
On the economy again: “The task at the moment is to keep the economy moving forward,” Mr Brown says. He says they need to maintain levels of public investment and to help with gas and electricity bills. He believes the economy is resilient enough to withstand global problems.
A challenge on pay. What can he do to maintain wage restrain private sector pay deals? Mr Brown answers with what he’s done in the public sector – itself a sore point, a very sore point, to millions of people outside of this room.
He calls the oil market “the most sheltered market it in the world” along with food, in reference to OPEC, never his best mates.
What you can say is the PM is very strong on this. His knowledge is impressive, his analysis – agree with it or not – sounds perfectly reasonable, and he’s never as confident as he is talking economics.
Out comes that strange smile again. Mr Brown speaks, for at least the third time about how we need to use oil more efficiently and find alternative ways of producing energy.
The Treasury is looking at it, as is the financial services authority. The questioner says the Americans think there’s a ‘London loophole’.
Apparantly both US presidential candidates want to rein in speculation in the oil market. What does Mr Brown think?
Mr Brown has only two hand gestures. One involves forming a claw and hitting the table lightly with it. I have no idea what it’s supposed to mean. The second involves forming an upside-down cup with both hands and placing them on the table. They don’t seem to bear any resemblence to what he’s saying. It has a curiously dissassociative effect. A minor point, I know, but one finds oneself thinking about such things when he talks about population density for longer than a minute.
That being said, he could put people down far more effectively with humourous asides. That clearly isn’t going to happen.
“Perhaps it’s better for you that we do move on,” Mr Brown replies. Flashes of anger and irritation from the prime minister. It’s surprisingly satisfying to see them, given how often we are forced to watch the press-friendly version of his character.
An attack on last week’s planning bill – his response is greeted by a “that’s not true prime minister, but let’s move on.”
As is what his questioner describes as government lack of action over nuclear power and renewables since Labour came to power.
There’s another nasty line on questioning on global fuel prices. The PM’s tactic to talk to the Saudi’s is treated contemptuously.
But Mr Brown does say protectionism is the worst thing that could happen to the world economy. He undoubtably believes it – he’s been saying it for years – but its a strange global rcession that doesn’t get protectionist, and he must know that too.
Casual attempts to make Mr Brown say something bad about Fench president Sarkozy come to nothing.
Mr Brown is placing alot of hope on this trade deal, and how important next week’s G8 meeting is in securing it.
Mr Brown agrees in so far as he dislikes the common agricultural policy. But he does mention the EU leads in aid and seeking trade deals.
The EU acts like a selfish club, Mr Brown is told, after Mandelson, as trade commissioner, made limited attempts to change things on trade. “Can we look for anything from the EU other than protectionism?” he continues.
Onto the EU.
Mr Brown warns MPs we need a green revoilution in the deveoping world, and that therefore aid levels must stay as they are.
He’s stopped now. Thanks heavens for that.
Mr Brown rests his arm on the back of the chair, much like the Fonz in Happy Days. It makes me feel uncomfortable just to look at it.
On global economics, Mr Brown says his focus is on reducing the UK’s dependence on oil.
Edward Leigh picks up on any deals done with the DUP over 42-day detention. Mr Brown’s reply is longwinded and clearly irritates his questioner. He gets his categorical answer though. Mr Brown has given it several times now. If anyone finds anything suggesting otherwise he’s in real, real trouble.
Why aren’t the royal family covered by the equality bill, he’s asked, rather interestingly. Mr Brown says any changes would have to be discussed at a Commonwealth level.
As far as English legislation votes in the Commons go, he says an ‘English votes for English laws’ system would split the UK. He wants a different “headline”, whatever that means.
He points out 85 per cent of the UK comes from England. He praises devolution as a way of making sure the minority is doing well.
He’s asked about the English question, always a horrible question for the Scotsman.
He also wants the Commons to have the greater power – which it already does – and which any Commons politican thinks because, well, he’s in the Commons.
Mr Brown says he has a great deal of sympathy with Wright’s view on heriditary peers. Mr Brown voted for the 80 per cent system.
Tony Wright begins his line of questioning. “I have great doubts about” House of Lords reform. He wants to “clean up the place” and asks why there’s so many herriditary peers around.
He sticks to his white paper line – also in the manifesto.
He’s told how many in his own party voted against 80-20 (elected to unelected Lords).
Mr Brown is on safer territory now discussing House of Lords reform. Much better. You can’t lose votes on Lords reform can you? Apart from those of the Lords perhaps, but they’re few and far between.
Mr Brown is asked how things have gone with the non-Labour people he brought into the Cabinet, like Lord Digby Jones. He says it’s gone well.
This is unbelievable. Mr Vaz is asking Mr Brown if he offered anyone anything to get the vote through. People laugh, and both Mr Brown and Mr Vaz have a smirk on their face. It really is a daring and bizarre – almost Kafkaesque.
Again Mr Brown says he has the support of the country – probably true – and that he’s sorry the other parties didn’t support him.
“These measures will disproportionately affect the Muslim community,” Mr Vaz says.
But, as Mr Vaz points out (he’s almost like the version of himself before the sudden Damascian conversion he had during the build up to the 42-days vote) the civil contingencies bill still has to be activated.
Mr Brown says his disagreement with Liberty were over needing to activate a state of emergency for terrorism powers to come into force, giving the terrorist ‘publicity’.
“Liberty have made it very clear… they feel the compensation arrangements are totally unworkeable,” Mr Vaz says.
Keith Vaz gives every impression of being a critical, authoritative questioner, probably out of irritation at yesterday’s innuendo.
On terrorism laws, Mr Brown says: “I think the safeguards for the individual are sufficient.”
Keith Vaz asks the prime minister a question. Even more discomfort, given the row over his benefits, or otherwise, during yesterday’s PMQ’s. I hope he won’t be sending me any letters, Mr Brown jokes. Very few people laugh.
Wearing a white shirt, Mr Brown’s shoulders look short and he generally comes across as uncomfortable. One can’t help but remember how comfortable and in control of these events Tony Blair was. He used to sail through it. Mr Brown is sailing too, but nervously and right into the wind.
He smiles when he says it but a hint of anger this early in proceedings doesn’t sit well in the room.
“I don’t know if these microphones are working well enough,” Mr Brown replies after trying answering the question several times – in his own inimitably unsatisfying way, of course.
There has been a percieved conflict of interest, Mr Brown is told. In other walks of life conflicts of interest have to be addressed, the questioner continues.
There’s a difficult series of questions about the attorney general’s role, who Brown has brought into regular Cabinet meetings. This further politicises the role, his questioner says. “Aren’t you in danger of muddling the legal and the political?”
“I hope you’ll take one,” he’s told. Things are looking nasty for the PM already.
He is asked if he sleeps enough. He says he does and looks forward to his holiday.
“This is the best job in the world because many other people want this job,” Mr Brown tells them.
Gordon Brown is facing the Commons liason committee, where he is expected to face tough questions about the state of the economy from some of the country’s most senior MPs.
