POLITICO
Prime minister’s questions: a shouty, jeery, very occasionally useful advert for British politics. Here’s what you need to know from the latest session in POLITICO’s weekly run-through.
Elephant in the room: A new party leader’s debut PMQs is usually the top political story of the day. But Kemi Badenoch’s first outing against Keir Starmer as Tory chief was *slightly* overshadowed by Donald Trump winning the U.S. election. Both party leaders congratulated him — even if Starmer’s fulsome praise for the Republican comeback kid seemed like it was delivered through gritted teeth.
What they sparred about: Badenoch went straight in on questions about the impact of Trump’s presidency — and then pivoted to Starmer’s plans at home.
Open goal: The Tory leader pressed the PM on whether Foreign Secretary David Lammy — Britain’s top diplomat, no less — had apologized to Trump for labeling him a “neo-Nazi sympathizing sociopath” and “a racist KKK and Nazi sympathizer” before he joined Labour’s frontbench in 2020. He has since been more diplomatic. Badenoch pressed: “If the foreign secretary wouldn’t apologize, would the PM do so now on his behalf?”
Dinner table small talk: Unsurprisingly, Starmer stayed away from Lammy’s specific comments, only claiming the pair discussed a “number of issues” and that the whole thing was a “very constructive exercise.” Read into that what you will.
Causing mischief: Badenoch picked up that plenty in Starmer’s cabinet signed a motion trying to stop Trump addressing parliament way back in his first term. She asked if the government “can be more than student politicians” and invite the incoming U.S. president to parliament now. Answer came there none on that one.
Digging into the detail: Badenoch probed Starmer further on how Trump’s election could impact defense spending and free trade talks with the U.S. Trump’s long wanted NATO members to spend more on defense and is eyeing unilateral tariffs on U.S. imports.
Trading places: The PM confirmed he will “of course” discuss “issues of our economy” with Trump, though didn’t get into specifics. That, said Badenoch, showed he has “no plans whatsoever for building on the special relationship.”
Sticking to the script: Badenoch cheekily slammed the PM’s “scripted lines” — an attack that was somewhat weakened by her, er, reading her own questions out from a bit of paper. Labour’s Starm-troopers were more than happy to leap on this by jeering at her.
Parallel universe: Failed Tory leadership contender James Cleverly rose from the backbenches for the first time in many years to ask about promises Labour had broken. With another obviously pre-prepared line, Starmer quipped: “His problem is he can’t add up… if he could add up, he might be down here, rather than up there.” Ouch!
Helpful interventions of the week: Well-briefed backbench Labour MPs popped up to ask the PM to condemn previous comments made by Badenoch. Jacob Collier asked Starmer to confirm there are no plans to change maternity pay after the Tory leader suggested it was too high. Neil Coyle raised the government’s record on the minimum wage after Badenoch said it constrained businesses. Thanks, lads.
Totally unscientific scores on the doors: Starmer 6/10 … Badenoch 8/10.
Badenoch’s novelty as leader of the opposition meant she easily got Starmer unstuck. The PM — who still has a thumping Commons majority, let’s not forget — gave limited answers on some genuinely awkward questions. Starmer got louder cheers, but seemed a bit unsure on how to deal with the Tory jibes. He’ll have to get used to it.
