Skipper

I note that at least a couple of the candidates for Speaker, due to be chosen next Monday, are urging that PMQs be ended. I agree the weekly sessions seldom produce much clarity or elucidation of complexity and it also can resemble a farmyard, resonating with animal cries. I could also be argued that, being the most widely observed aspect of the Commons, have assisted the low opinion of politics by voters.

But I for one would be sad to see it go. Politics can be boring and inaccessible to the electorate; it is by nature complex and difficult. But PMQs
is an interlude in the week when a dash of colour,understandable to all, is added to the grey and sepia of public life. The gladiatorial aspect of the encounter can cause the baying and the pathetic attempts at soundbites, but at least we see our two major national leaders, facing up to each other in the theatre of the House of Commons. And wit and quickness of repartee is an indication of an important quality in my book.

How well the leaders perform is not of great moment to voters- Hague's brilliant showings against Blair, didn't help his poll ratings- but PMQs provides an opportunity for party leaders to rally their troops and inspire them for what should be a nationally important national debate on different ways to solve our problems. Other legislatures-I'm thinking of the Scandinavian ones especially- are incredibly dull and uninspiring. It is interesting also that PMQs is regularly watched in the USA on CSpan; across the Atlantic the president is never interrogated, challenged or even spoken to roughly by members of the legislature. Future Speakers, please don't deny our system one of its few unique and genuinely entertaining features.