Well this should be interesting! Rob: / @robthemodyt Daily Schedule: taffespace.wor... Patreon: / noahtaffe Twitch: / taffe316 Twitter: / taffe316games
I guess this is why "becoming prime minister" isn't really a goal for many people in the UK but "becoming president" in the US is. The prime minister is actually held accountable for their decisions and actions.
@@idot3331 statistically yes. but in reality the party decides who is the leader. If an everyday Brit tries to join then more often than not they are looked down on because of where we were born or how we were raised as well as who our parents are.
@@AWR271 except that you can reach that office without being born into excessive money and privalege. Maggie was famously the daughter of a greengrocer and dominated UK politics for more than 10 years. Her successor was also not of a particularly privaleged background and there are plenty of other examples. In the U.S. you'd need to be born into unbelievable wealth or be a useful figurehead for those bankrolling you, just in order to run for the office. Any British child can aim to be Prime Minister if they really want it. A child wanting to do the same in the U.S. would need to be incredibly rich from the get go or very good at making friends with rich and powerful people in order to have a chance.
Prime Ministers Questions is one of the best things you can do in a healthy democracy, it keeps the Prime Minister accountable to the MP's and the public.
I disagree, no-one would get answers and everyone would get increasingly annoyed with him so i understand what you're saying but i'd bet he'd leave thinking himself a genius for answering the questions in his own special way that's too smart for everyone else to understand and when people later call him on his BS he'd say they were "fake news".
This session was quite tame compared to many of the others I've seen and with the likes of Tony Blair and David Camaron that could really speak, I suspect they would rip the likes of Trump apart if he was in there, Trump doesn't come across as being smart in fast heated debates, more so if up agaisnt someone that could play him.
all of them have been replaced now, John bercow the speaker of the house, teresa may prime minister, and Jeremy corbyn leader of the opposition. Teresa may and Jeremy corbyn still hold back bench seats so not completely gone but bercow is gone.
Fun fact: In britain you do not elect the prime minister. You elect a Member of Parliament, who represents your constituency. The Prime Minister (there is only one prime minister) just happens to lead the party with the majority, and must get parliament to agree with her/him to do anything. Every person in that room you see is an elected representative of a local township or abstract area of land containing people (a constituency) and they all belong to different parties. Another fun fact: There are more left wing parties than right wing parties. If you tallied all the left votes and right votes the left would win, but we dont because of our first past the post system, which no-one except the two big parties like.
Oh, also: Everything the House of Commons does has to go through the House of Lords. Which is really, REALLY hard to explain. go onto the youtube channel Jay Foreman there's a good explanation there.
i would point out that the voting system was put up to public referendum in 2011, the people voted to keep first past the post over the alternative voting system (although turnout was only about 44%). it is currently the only national vote that hasn't involved the EEC or the EU in general.
tj o He couldn't do that. The Prime Minister is not elected, she is appointed, and if she failed to do her job, which PMQs is part of, she would probably be removed from office
This happens every Wednesday, and it's televised live and unedited. Some see it as an opportunity for people to see their government in action, others as an opportunity for MPs to show off. It is amazing how well polished the questions and answers are, however every Prime Minister when asked will say that this is the most terrifying part of the job. Also It's not just the PM who has to answer questions. Question Time is a almost a daily event with different members of the government appearing each day.
The speaker is John Bercow. He's well known for his style (?) and there's loads of compilations on YT. Betty Boothroyd was great too, but my MP Lindsay Holye is worth a watch as well.
As a young boy I wasn't interested in politics at all .Today I find it interesting,sometimes comical.Your average politician can't even lie straight in bed.
16:25 TM: “Let me tell the right honourable gentleman what I’ve been doing over the last week...” Labour MP: “Panicking” That’s about the most accurate response for how May has dealt with Brexit.
As to your questions, as noted below - pmqs is every wednesday except for the their summer holiday. The speaker is basically the arbiter of conduct in the house - fwiw I like him even though he is a tory (conservative).
How can you let these people run your country. They are acting juvenile and unprofessional. They are supposed to be a legislature, not a theatric performance. As an American I was always told you guys were supposed to be posh and sophisticated. Orderly and intellegent. One of our closest allies etc, etc. This is ridiculous. Members of Congress or in your case Parliament are supposed to treat themselves and thus their position, with respect and dignity. They are supposed to represent the people that elected them are they not??? I would be ashamed if my Senator acted this way. Why is it like this in the UK? Is this normal?
>James Gravil Hahah alright I thought as much. I mean if they put up with politicians doing this crap then I guess sophistication is out the window. How can Brits talk like they are above everyone else when their government consistes of whiney children 😂
Za Warudo, it's not childish, its passion. You think everyone in congress agrees with each other? The adversarial nature of parliament is what makes it special. I would rather have them shouting for their cause and standing for their beliefs where I can see them than your option. Their way of keeping their dignity is to stand and argue, fight for the people who elected them... yours seems to be to look like a president, and make dodgy back room deals away from the public eye. You are a fool if you think that is better.
May does struggle in PM Q’s! To be good at that you have to be charismatic and a good orator, both of which she’s not. I didn’t like the previous Prime Minister (David Cameron) at all but he was good at both of those things at least.
+ The Dastardly Penguin ,, David Cameron Proved Himself To Be A Traitorous Jackass , He Calls For The Brexit Vote , Loses , Then Cowardly Runs Away Leaving The Country In The Mess That He Started ...
+igeto ,, If He Stated Before The vote He Would Resign , Why Then At Prime ministers Question Time In june When Asked Directly Would He Resign if the Result of the Vote Was LEAVE Did He Answer The Question By a Stating "NO" ?...
igeto;; can you help me out as i am an american student visiting London, can you please give me an example of when david cameron said before the 06/23/16 brexit vote that he would resign if the result was to leave the EU, i am trying to write a paper on the whole brexit event But i cant find a single record of primeminister cameron Ever saying before the vote that he planed to leave if he was to lose.
Fran and it's that kind of thinking that leaves us with people like Trump in charge. Yes there have been plenty of bad leaders who were good orators, but that doesn't discount the skill's importance. To lead people, and especially to lead a constantly power hungry and rebellious government, you need to be a good orator. To see what those skills accomplish, look no further than MLK Jr, or Gaius Julius Caesar, even Winston Churchill who, although a horrid person, was really the only reason the British Empire stayed in the fight against Hitler. Alone. In terms of ordinary leaders, good oratory skills means ensuring unity in a country (something which countries like the USA and UK are deeply missing with the left/right schism) as well as obedience in government, allowing various laws to be passed and changes to be made (look no further than Obama, like him or not, he had to fight every step of the way to do anything, and he did it well). Do you need to have more than good oratory skills? Of course! Without these skills, bumbling idiots become in charge of governments and are often unable to unite their country, only having control of their core base (like Trump) and even struggling to have control of their own government (like Theresa May).
How this has aged. In two and a half years, the Prime Minster has resigned, a general election took place giving the Conservatives a huge majority, the leader of the opposition resigned after such a crushing defeat and was then kicked out of the Labour party by his successor because of the anti-Semitism scandal mentioned. Oh, and the speaker has gone as well.
'Allo Allo!' A BBC comedy based in occupied France. It could only be made in Britain and is hilarious. 'Dad's Army' is also hilarious. It's a send-up of the Home Guard during WWII. Beautiful cat you have there!
Former Tiller girl, those high kickers who showed their knickers on tv's Sunday Night at the Palladium....Betty was Queen of Speakers, always one of "us"...
Compared to Spanish Parliament (I´m spanish), where there´s no transparency and only one speaker from every party can speak, this is the temple of real democracy. I feel ashamed
Prime Minister's Questions summarized. M.P.s from the Prime Minister's party: Will the Prime Minister agree they are are great? M.P.s from the opposition: Will the Prime Minister agree they are an idiot?
"Why does she try to laugh off every question" because she's a terrible leader and if she answered the questions she'd just be showing people what a vile shrew she is
@@gabesscottscott4070 she has a habit of saying one thing and then doing another, ignoring facts, spouting meaningless sound bites, she doesn't seem in control of the party and, to me, she only seems interested in her own pocket rather than what's best for the country. I'm bias, I don't like the tories and the "I'm ok, it's all about me" attitude to life. These things also don't stand her out against previous PMs either though, many are just as bad, I'm just paying more attention at the moment and I don't view her as a leader.
@@lemming9984 "the commies" what are you on about. People aren't calling for a second referendum, they're calling for a referendum on the final deal. Given how the current deal appears to be the worst of all sides, I don't really got how people object to that. Her Brexit work doesn't seem great, she's just sat in the middle and dithered.
Like or dislike may or may Prime minister but at least they can stand up to a grilling without flailing incomprehensibly. Now imagine the comedy master class if America had its version of Prime ministers questions and trump was subjected to this kind of grilling
When you see a minister stand up its because they haven't submitted a question prior to the debate and would like to ask one- the speaker chooses who should ask a non submitted question.
The thing that I like about the Prime Ministers Questions is that they don't know before hand what they will be, so there reactions are genuine & they cannot pre plan for them.
Prime Ministers Question Time is every Wednesday when Parliament is sitting (which is most of the time when not on a break) and that was was only a few weeks ago, maybe a month and a bit
Im from England and this PM is one of the worst ive ever seen but still more favourable than the opposition. Everything is a mess, she has no backbone and is a joke to represent this country. Brexit means brexit she says yet is making a joke of the negotiations. 😠 Ill stop now.
Mathew Mercer Europe are being as stubborn as they possible can because they don’t know what compromise means and if we think back to before the referendum, Camron was trying to negotiate a new kind of EU but they didn’t believe we would ever vote to leave so you would of thought they would of learnt by now what compromise is but obviously not.
silverfoxeater if I was in charge I wouldn't be... If someone wants to leave I'd make it as ammicable as possible... because I'm not a dick. Seems like I'm in the minority however,and I was pro EU and a remainer until this shit show, now I'm dubious of their intentions. And my own fucking representatives... God damn politics can go fudge itself lol
Mathew Mercer Brexit is a horrendous mistake. Asking people if the want something without costing and explaining what it is was a dumb move. The effects of which will only effect people who haven't had a vote. Corbyn is a much better option. But even he isn't for a second referendum.
This particular edition of Prime Minister Questions (PMQ's) happened very recently, PMQs happens every week on a Wednesday at 12pm when Parliament is sitting, it normally lasts about half a hour, I've been near the House of Commons when this is going on and it sounded loud from where I was outside of the building
So a few notes: -The House of Commons is deliberately too small -Clapping is forbidden, hence the RRRRUUUUURRRRR noise they make -The Prime Minister doesn’t get any advance notice of what questions will be asked -MPs aren’t allowed to refer to each other by name. They’re “the Member for” or addressed by title -All statements in the House are actually made to the Speaker, never to another Member. “Mr Speaker, does the Prime Minister think X?” -The Speaker is basically God in that room -The Queen is strictly forbidden from setting foot inside the House of Commons. The last monarch to enter the Commons was Charles I in the 17th century when he tried to arrest a number of MPs. The Civil War and Glorious Revolution established that Parliament is more powerful than the monarch -MPs are encouraged to make as much noise as humanly possible
There's only a handful of countries, that force the leader of the nation, to sit down in front of 600 people to be questioned on anything. That's some pretty open shit
She keeps saying Brexit means Brexit but what does Brexit mean to her, become a puppet of the EU and follow all the same rules as the EU and get as little say in making new rules as we do now, because that’s not what is should mean at all
Mr Kieran12327 if that's what the EU wants, they have the position of power due to the sheer number of countries and resources they have, so theresa can't do anything because she has little to no influence. Also a lot of EU laws are better in regulating in general (for example the cladding that started the fire at grenfell, which was in accordance with UK law but not EU laws because EU laws say it has to be fire resistant) so really I don't see what's bad about following EU laws when the ones we have are less effective
The Leave Vote was to leave the EU. We could still remain in the EEA like Norway, and the referendum would still be respected. Perhaps if the Leave campaigns had outlined a clear united vision of what they intended leave to look like, it might have helped.
Also, it's mad to call Brexit the will of people. The vote was basically a 50/50 split for yes and no (a very slim majority for leave of course). A lot of people (young folk in particular) who will be most affected by leaving the EU weren't even able to vote in the referendum and now even some leave voters are having second thoughts about it.
A Mc That's a rather sweeping generalisation to make. I'd rather take a vote from a supposedly clueless 16 year old than a vote from an adult living in a Brexit fantasy world where they foolishly believe the UK will be better off outside the EU. The youth of today after all are the ones that are going to have to live the longest with the consequences of the moronic decision to leave the EU, so of course they should have a say in it.
A Mc Also, we're the ones dealing with reality on reality's terms, not you. We know what a disaster Brexit will be for our country which is why we're so mad at folks like you for voting to leave. Feel free to keep living in your fantasy world, just make sure you have adequate food there to keep you going. You're going to need it.
Matthew Bay It was actually a 34% vote. Only 34% of the electorate voted for it. Granted it was a 52/48 from those that bothered to vote on that day (I despair at those that didn't vote), but much like any Democracy it's always prudent to continually ask questions. A second vote isn't undemocratic in the same way that an early General Election isnt. If the collective will of the people is seen to change, it's mandated.
This is what you REALLY NEED ! ............"The Best Of David Cameron"....Our previous Prime Minister. 8 minutes 40 seconds of Comedy Gold at Prime Minister's Questions... Tell us what you think, my friend :)
Just a bit of trivia, but the house of commons was built so that the stands on either side were about 3.96 metres apart. This might not seem relevant until you realise that is around two sword lengths. People in parliament were so notorious for getting into fights in the tense atmosphere, that the room was built so they couldn't just whip out their swords and fight each other across the gap.
A lot of people dislike PMQ and say it is boring and is banter. But the point of it is to give the opposition the chance to scrutinise the government so that any mistakes that are made are not repeated as it directly gives the opposition the political advantage.
Regarding the definition a few things on Antisemitism: 1) At the time she made the comments the definition was not in her party's rules like she said... they were hastily added after it was pointed out by a news program, so she lied to parliament... the added wording is so sloppy it isn't funny. 2) She lied again saying that Labour was re-defining antisemitism to say that Israel is a racist endeavor... The definition that Labour is using is the international wording, they did omit certain examples which included that example along with it being considered antisemitic to compare the Israel government to the Nazis. Whether Labour should or should not accept these examples is an issue of valid debate, but it should be noted the Tory Party's rules even after they changed them do not specifically include these examples, it just says the recognise that definition. The reason why these were omitted is simple: These examples equated criticizing a government or a specific country or governments actions with being antisemitic. The logic is that no government or country should be considered beyond criticism. 3) One of the key people who came up with that definition has said that he is not comfortable with the examples as these were not intended to be used in policies in the first place, and considered it dangerous for them to be used in such a way as it could stifle reasonable free speech. 4) Studies also show that the Conservative party has a bigger antisemitism problem than the Labour Party (but not significantly), but does have a huge history of racism, sexism, homophobia and Islamophobia.... so you have to ask yourself the question, why is this such a "major issue" if the party pointing fingers falls so short. The answer is the newspapers are largely right wing in the UK, and even the more centrist and left papers don't like the leader of the Labour Party. The real reason this is such a hot topic.... distraction.... So people don't notice how bad Brexit is, how bad the poor and disabled have been treated by this government, how many Black people who had the right to stay in the UK we being treated as illegal immigrants by this government (an issue that falls right at the Prime Minister's feet), and so on and so forth. Now to be honest there is an issue in the Labour party. The Labour party is generally speaking sympathetic to Palestinians, and being left leaning are not going to be fans of the current Israeli government. Because of this there will be some people in the party who associate the actions of the Israeli government with Jews as a whole. These are a very small minority of course, but it should not be tolerated. But as I pointed out this is not an issue with the Labour party, studies show it is a problem in all parties at a low level, but increasing the more right wing a party is.
I agree with this evaluation for the most part. I'm also not a fan of the examples given, because I do think they stray perilously close to claiming a tacit immunity from criticism for the actions of the state of Israel. It is a poorly written definition. However, Corbyn is a long time supporter of Hamas, which has been declared a terrorist organisation by the European Court of Justice. Given his history, he was foolish to take this stance. It's difficult to defend his position as simply a quibble over the implications of the language used. ///But as I pointed out this is not an issue with the Labour party/// I disagree with this. I think it is an issue within the Labour party. More-so as the party becomes more extremist.
Well as I said there are studies that indicate that antisemitic beliefs is actually less of a problem in Labour than it is with the Tories. I think it is easier to point out in Labour as Labour is less racist overall. But the conflation of antisemitism and objecting to the actions of the Israeli government is a common and dangerous practice by critics. It is like suggesting that all people who are critical of Trump are anti-American. That said, There is a belief among Jewish people that antisemitism is a problem in Labour, however Jewish people who took part in the survey are overwhelmingly more inclined to Vote Tory. So there is a chicken and egg question on this issue.
///But the conflation of antisemitism and objecting to the actions of the Israeli government is a common and dangerous practice by critics./// Yes, I'd agree with that. But I think that conflating racism with rational criticism, is a common practice generally and one that the Labour party are not afraid to exploit when it suits them. There are rational concerns over the rise in knife crime for example, or the nature of Islamic fundamentalism, or the impact of rapid immigration on social infrastructure, or the prevalence of grooming gangs ...that have essentially been made very difficult, if not impossible to address without being accused of being either far right, or racist ...when in fact the issues are neither. It's identity politics. It's defending the interests of 'groups' who perceive themselves as victims in order to gain their votes - often at the expense of reasoned debate. For a party that has exploited identity politics so extensively, I dont think Corbyn can complain too much when it's used against him. That is not to say it's justified, but that if you live by the sword, you should expect to die by it. Giving groups 'immunity' by encouraging the conflation of reasoned criticism with group-ism is a dangerous practice, whatever form it takes. Whether it's conflating anti-Semitism with criticism of Israel, or forcing society to use a persons preferred pronouns, it has the same result. If the left suppress the rational concerns of the middle by using identity politics to make subjects off limits, you push the middle to the right ...and eventually there will be a push-back. See brexit.
i have to say this open debate makes me proud to be british. the commets in this section go head to head on the facts and opinions expressed and have yet to fall into the typical character assassination you normally see from our cousins across the pond. as dark as times may seem as we head from brexit as long as us brits can remain civil and continue a dialogue with our different opinion i remain hopeful that the uk will survive whatever happens to us.
All I have to say is welcome to British Politics! Teresa may was the Pm nobody voted for basically she hasn't solved much at all and she nearly always avoids answering questions, the Speaker is pretty awsome he adds a bit of entertainment but personally I can't stand watching Parliament debates its like they get nowhere with anything but anyway keep up the good content can't wait for ur upcoming commercials 5 and the soaps one and any gaming stuff! Finally just wanted to say I meet loads of different people every day its my job and the amount of American people we get over here is amazing spoke to a guy today he's lived in the UK for 15 years and he loves it apparently gives me hope for our country :)
Thank you for putting this video up this happens every week and it can be quite fiery to say the least. The reason the PM didn’t answer the question on the Government Ministers being implemented in Vote Leave is it is an ongoing police investigation see 9:33 It is unparliamentary behaviour to imply misconduct of an member of the House of Commons hence people are referred to as Right Honourable or Honourable Lady or Gentlemen and Right Honourable or Honourable friend if they are from the person speaking’s Political Party. I hope this makes sense happy to inform you more on British Politics. Keep doing your thing. Scott.
Now you've seen this, do yourself a favour and type Two Party System Spitting Image into youtube. It's a parody of house of common debates with puppets from the 80s when Margaret Thatcher came to power. It mocks how they talk to each other and it's hilarious...and despite being based on completely different people, it's so similar to this.
You should react to a classic BBC series, "Yes Minister" or the sequel "Yes Prime minister." It is a political satire from the 80s that is as relevant today as when it was first made. The content is politically neutral.
PM question time IS NOT a once a year thing... It is a weekly part of their political process. There really is no comparable opportunity for the legislature to question the nation's informal leader in the US federal system of government, unfortunately... Sometimes, I kinda wish we hadn't been so stubborn abt adopting anything British... MOST ESPECIALLY right now in American politics!!
MP's are NOT allowed to refer to each other by name, they must call each other "My Honourable Friend" or "The Honourable member for Such and such a place" There are two lines on the floor down the centre of the house, MP's must not step over these lines. The lines are 2 sword lengths apart to prevent sword fights (MP's are allowed swords but not guns, they have two pegs each in the locker rooms, one for their coats the other for swords) The leader of the 2nd largest party (the opposition) is allowed 6 questions, the leader of the 3rd largest party gets 3 questions, Every other MP gets put into a lottery and each week random MPs get to ask questions, their names are known in advance but thier questions are not. Prime Ministers Questions happen every week (on Wednesdays at lunch time) . The equivalent to the "State of the Union" address would be the "Queens Speech" which despite it's name is written entirely by the Prime Minister and is once a year, it's very long and boring and includes a ceremony wher a guy called "Black Rod" has a door slammed in his face and he gets to pound on the door with his eponymous Black Rod. ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-9o65Ap7nC8w.html
You should definitely react to British reality shows like Geordie shore, big brother towie and love island. If interested I could send some links if the best scenes / arguments
Basically the questions have been submitted to the PM in advance.. After that there are long established responses of cheerful booing by the opposition and here hereing by the government parties, with the speaker keeping order. He will issue warnings and throw MPs out if they get too bolsie. He's generally seen as being very entertaining.
16:37 "What happened? Put the camera on it!" The reason they don't do that is because of the guidelines that broadcasting must follow regarding parliament. These guidelines include not showing hecklers (presumably to avoid attention seekers). Here is the full document: www.bbc.co.uk/guidelines/editorialguidelines/assets/advice/parliamentary_broadcasting.pdf
