PMQs should be replaced with other scrutiny

Question 1

PMQs positives

Answer 1

-takes place once a week and is televised, keeps PM on top of their brief, and holds the PM accountable for issues of the day e.g. Starmer’s questioning of Johnson’s covid-19 policies
-strong performing PMs e.g. Cameron can use it to strengthen their power, but weaker performers e.g. Major watch their authority decline
-backbenchers can use the process to redress their constituent’s grievances and HMO has the privilege of 6 questions allowing LOHMO to strengthen their profile

Question 2

PMQs evaluation

Answer 2

-the process is characterised by partisanship and orchestrated questioning from the whips
-during the Cameron years the phrase ‘long term economic plan’ was used in questions plotted by whips ahead of sessions
-the commons speaker does not enforce direct answers or clarifications either

Question 3

more time for MQT

Answer 3

-questioning is serious and effective, more accountability, e.g. Health Secretary Hancock having to explain covid-19 related statutory instruments
-unlike in PMQs there is not the atmosphere of a pantomime
-all questions must be submitted in advance so ‘softball’ questions can be weeded out
-deep dives into policy can happen e.g. Amber Rudd and Windrush

Question 4

MQT evaluation

Answer 4

-minister rarely give straightforward answers to difficult questions
-occasionally ministers send junior minister in their place e.g Chancellor Osbourne

Question 5

more time for select committees

Answer 5

-chairs are elected by secret ballot so cannot be rigged by whips, rebellious MPs often nominate troublesome backbenchers e.g. Hunt as chair of Health Select Committee
-chairs can call upon experts and witnesses
-members take their jobs very seriously and prioritise the national interest
-40% of recommendations are taken up by the government

Question 6

select committees evaluation

Answer 6


-60% of recommendations are ignored
-a lot of ‘grandstanding’ to generate media interest
-many MPs lack the ability to forensically examine their own party

Question 7

more time for HMO/backbench business

Answer 7

-balance of power has shifted slightly towards legislature rather than executive
-more time to utilise ‘shadowing’ of HMO
-gives the public more access to HMO and LOHMO
-allows potential popular but minor issues to be heard

Question 8

HMO/backbench business evaluation

Answer 8

-opposition and backbench debates often end up into issues of their own,not the national interest
-opposition days are essentially a ‘talking shop’ votes taken are not binding and are ignored

Question 9

more time for PMBs

Answer 9

-ensures parliamentary business is not entirely government dominated
-allows for a greater degree of representation
-can settle non-partisan issues e.g. abortion act 1967

Question 10

PMBs evaluation

Answer 10

-only considered on fridays
-a majority of PMBs never become law