What do you think?
Rate this book
Punch and Judy Politics: An Insider's Guide to Prime Minister’s Questions
Prime Minister’s Questions is the bear pit of British politics, a unique way of holding the powerful to account. While it is watched and admired around the world, it is often hated at home for bringing out the worst in our politicians. However, despite the best attempts of successive party leaders to try and move away from ‘Punch and Judy politics’, PMQs are here to stay. It sets the agenda, indicates who’s up and who's down and, most importantly, defines Prime Ministers and Leaders of the Opposition.
Ayesha Hazarika and Tom Hamilton spent every Wednesday morning for five years preparing Ed Miliband for combat ahead of PMQs, with varying degrees of success.
They know what it’s like to prepare a leader for the most stressful, unforgiving moment of the political week and they have lived through the drama, tension and black humour that goes with being in the room. They have seen the highs when a leader wins at the Dispatch Box as well as – perhaps more often – the lows when they take a beating.
This book lifts the lid on PMQs, reveals the tricks of the trade from leading politicians and the people who prepared them, and takes you behind the scenes of some of the biggest PMQs moments.
Part history, part inside account, this book is an entertaining and honest guide to one of the most loved, feared and loathed features of British politics by two people who know just how tough it can be.
Ayesha Hazarika and Tom Hamilton spent every Wednesday morning for five years preparing Ed Miliband for combat ahead of PMQs, with varying degrees of success.
They know what it’s like to prepare a leader for the most stressful, unforgiving moment of the political week and they have lived through the drama, tension and black humour that goes with being in the room. They have seen the highs when a leader wins at the Dispatch Box as well as – perhaps more often – the lows when they take a beating.
This book lifts the lid on PMQs, reveals the tricks of the trade from leading politicians and the people who prepared them, and takes you behind the scenes of some of the biggest PMQs moments.
Part history, part inside account, this book is an entertaining and honest guide to one of the most loved, feared and loathed features of British politics by two people who know just how tough it can be.
- GenresPoliticsNonfiction
352 pages, Hardcover
Published May 29, 2018
46 people are currently reading
239 people want to read
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 15 of 15 reviews
June 4, 2018
I'm not naturally drawn to books about politics. I'm not naturally drawn to enquire about Prime Minister's Question Time, an event which has always struck me as noisy and brash, without serving much of a useful purpose. This book entirely disabuses that notion.
I was drawn in from the first sentences.' You're the Leader of the Opposition. it's your job to choose one of the week's top political news stories and write six questions to the Prime Minister about it. Not exam questions, not questions you might ask an expert, but awkward, hostile questions that will put the Prime Minister on the back foot ....'.
I was immediately interested. This book describes how PMQs play a defining role in British politics. This once-a-week contest between Prime Minister and Opposite Number forces each of the pair not only to prepare well, backed by a team of advisers, but to examine their own policies, and understand where and why they might be weak. Preparing to spar with their opponent, undermining them with clever questions, a wounding joke, an unreturnable rejoinder is an important and time-consuming part of their routine. Some participants have performed well - even extremely well: William Hague, David Cameron and Tony Blair generally rose well to the occasion. Others did not. Ian Duncan Smith never shone, and the current sparring partners, Theresa May and Jeremy Corbyn bring no spark to the event.
Understanding more of this weekly show, and its purpose in building or destroying morale among the troops (the MPs), in providing fodder for the press, and in fine tuning policy has been illuminating.
It's a thorough, informative and funny account of this peculiarly British institution. I read it willingly and with real interest. And not just because (and I ought to mention my interest here) one of the authors, Tom Hamilton, is my son.
I was drawn in from the first sentences.' You're the Leader of the Opposition. it's your job to choose one of the week's top political news stories and write six questions to the Prime Minister about it. Not exam questions, not questions you might ask an expert, but awkward, hostile questions that will put the Prime Minister on the back foot ....'.
I was immediately interested. This book describes how PMQs play a defining role in British politics. This once-a-week contest between Prime Minister and Opposite Number forces each of the pair not only to prepare well, backed by a team of advisers, but to examine their own policies, and understand where and why they might be weak. Preparing to spar with their opponent, undermining them with clever questions, a wounding joke, an unreturnable rejoinder is an important and time-consuming part of their routine. Some participants have performed well - even extremely well: William Hague, David Cameron and Tony Blair generally rose well to the occasion. Others did not. Ian Duncan Smith never shone, and the current sparring partners, Theresa May and Jeremy Corbyn bring no spark to the event.
Understanding more of this weekly show, and its purpose in building or destroying morale among the troops (the MPs), in providing fodder for the press, and in fine tuning policy has been illuminating.
It's a thorough, informative and funny account of this peculiarly British institution. I read it willingly and with real interest. And not just because (and I ought to mention my interest here) one of the authors, Tom Hamilton, is my son.
December 21, 2023
Skimmed. Several interesting insights on PMQs, which most will be unaware of. These include measures related to the history, preparation, and execution of PMQs, as well as how PMQs is spun to the media after it concludes each week.
Although, I found the book too repetitive (queue the ‘PMQs is like theatre’). It lacks conciseness. It’s 337 pages; it could have been 250.
Although, I found the book too repetitive (queue the ‘PMQs is like theatre’). It lacks conciseness. It’s 337 pages; it could have been 250.
January 4, 2019
Book #1 of 2019 - done. Just 39 to go.
A good one to start off the year. Although it was explicitly about PMQs, it also served as an interesting look at British politics from Thatcher onwards (PMQs history does pre-date this, but televising it doesn't, so the insights are limited). It's a very elite-level history obviously, but it showed insights into the political strategies of all PMs and Leaders of the Opposition over that time.
It was interesting hearing about the different tactics and strategies that work in PMQs, and the different functions it performs - a testing ground for election slogans, exposing oversights in government policy, a platform for leaders to prove themselves to their parties, etc.
It's an "insiders' guide" to PMQs, as the authors have worked on it for a few Labour leaders, which has the dual effect of giving really good insights into what goes on, but also can feel like they're a bit too close to the situation. (They are very much of the opinion that PMQs is a good thing - they're quite persuasive in this, but it does feel a bit inevitable. If you're asked to work on something for years, it's easier to think it has a purpose).
But on the whole it's a good read, insights from most living party leaders, well written, and doesn't overstay its welcome. It was a Good Read.
A good one to start off the year. Although it was explicitly about PMQs, it also served as an interesting look at British politics from Thatcher onwards (PMQs history does pre-date this, but televising it doesn't, so the insights are limited). It's a very elite-level history obviously, but it showed insights into the political strategies of all PMs and Leaders of the Opposition over that time.
It was interesting hearing about the different tactics and strategies that work in PMQs, and the different functions it performs - a testing ground for election slogans, exposing oversights in government policy, a platform for leaders to prove themselves to their parties, etc.
It's an "insiders' guide" to PMQs, as the authors have worked on it for a few Labour leaders, which has the dual effect of giving really good insights into what goes on, but also can feel like they're a bit too close to the situation. (They are very much of the opinion that PMQs is a good thing - they're quite persuasive in this, but it does feel a bit inevitable. If you're asked to work on something for years, it's easier to think it has a purpose).
But on the whole it's a good read, insights from most living party leaders, well written, and doesn't overstay its welcome. It was a Good Read.
February 10, 2019
I wouldn’t have read this but it was in my house and I had a few hours free on a weekend. It was well-researches, and the authors were clearly very authoritative on the issues covered. But I found it quite sad to read - both because it really brought home just how much time of the UK’s political leadership is spent preparing for ephemeral once-weekly Q&A sessions, and because of the trend towards PMQs becoming even less valuable as leaders use it to display clips of themselves shouting from the dispatch box. Worth reading if you’re interested in UK politics, but mainly as a deep-dive into one of the odd features that makes it more dysfunctional.
June 7, 2020
I really enjoyed this book. It was far more insightful than I expected and explored the history, tradition and strategies behind PMQs with just the right level of detail.
Accompanied by interviews with many of the main players over the last three decades, both in the spotlight and behind the scenes and relevant and humorous extracts from Hansard, it is fascinating and, at times, very funny.
I often complain publicly about PMQs, as do many other observers. This book acknowledges the issues with its public perception and addresses each concern very well. I may not have changed my mind completely but I’ll definitely be watching it through a different lens going forward.
Accompanied by interviews with many of the main players over the last three decades, both in the spotlight and behind the scenes and relevant and humorous extracts from Hansard, it is fascinating and, at times, very funny.
I often complain publicly about PMQs, as do many other observers. This book acknowledges the issues with its public perception and addresses each concern very well. I may not have changed my mind completely but I’ll definitely be watching it through a different lens going forward.
December 5, 2020
A very well written and researched read about a very niche topic. You do need to be the sort of person who regularly watches PMQs to get the most out of this as it is tightly focused on those Wednesday jousts. Both of the authors worked for the Labour party but there are contributions in the form of quotes from Tories as well.
Recommended only for those with a strong interest in British politics.
Recommended only for those with a strong interest in British politics.
July 1, 2018
Great for political junkies
Concentrated overmuch on recent PMQ’s and may have been a little biased in favour of the left but was a comprehensive account of all that goes into PMQ’s. It is a book that both May and Corbyn might benefit from reading.
Concentrated overmuch on recent PMQ’s and may have been a little biased in favour of the left but was a comprehensive account of all that goes into PMQ’s. It is a book that both May and Corbyn might benefit from reading.
May 3, 2020
Intermediate-level politics book that sweeps through the last 15 years of UK government using PMQs as a hook. Very geeky but you would expect that of a pair who worked with Ed Miliband for five years.
January 4, 2019
Good overview with plenty of access, interesting tidbits, and analysis. Could have been a lot shorter.
February 2, 2019
Excellent book for political junkies.
May 28, 2019
Certainly niche, but well written and very interesting!
August 15, 2019
Made me laugh. Left me gobsmacked. Politics is fun.
July 9, 2021
Really entertaining writing and also makes you look more closely at PMQs!
December 4, 2021
Fair interesting. Probably much more interesting if you follow PMQs very closely, watch it often etc. But interesting enough.
January 14, 2023
What starts out claiming to be a decent history of PMQs as an institution quickly loses a lot of steam because the authors get bogged down in minor detail, leaving the bigger picture aside. The early prime ministers who (kind of) founded the institution are not really fixated upon except to show that they (as much as everyone else) has thought it one of the tougher elements of the job. Yet, while bringing this out the emphasis has fallen away from the fact that when MacMillan and Wilson spoke to the House, they really had to know what they were doing — while these days the answering of questions is less than common.
In this, it feels that the authors’ first hand experience as part of Ed Miliband’s Labour PMQs team is more of a hindrance to the story than anything else. The best sections are continuously the ones where either Blair or Cameron’s opposition time are described, i.e., the parts where the authors had to do some research and investigations. In comparison, the descriptions of Ed Miliband’s leadership and, at the same time, of Cameron’s time in-office, are much more personal. Unfortunately, the authors end up using these instances quite a bit as “We had a very good idea” or “This didn’t pan out as we wanted”, making it a list of apologies for why Miliband was not the greatest leader of the opposition. This reduces the overall value of the book. I also found that a number of the described “strategies” start to repeat themselves, or, if they differed, the differences were so minuscule not to be really worth separating out.
It’s not a bad book per se, but it also doesn’t match what it could have been had someone not so personally involved have been investigating the topic.
This review was originally posted on my blog.
In this, it feels that the authors’ first hand experience as part of Ed Miliband’s Labour PMQs team is more of a hindrance to the story than anything else. The best sections are continuously the ones where either Blair or Cameron’s opposition time are described, i.e., the parts where the authors had to do some research and investigations. In comparison, the descriptions of Ed Miliband’s leadership and, at the same time, of Cameron’s time in-office, are much more personal. Unfortunately, the authors end up using these instances quite a bit as “We had a very good idea” or “This didn’t pan out as we wanted”, making it a list of apologies for why Miliband was not the greatest leader of the opposition. This reduces the overall value of the book. I also found that a number of the described “strategies” start to repeat themselves, or, if they differed, the differences were so minuscule not to be really worth separating out.
It’s not a bad book per se, but it also doesn’t match what it could have been had someone not so personally involved have been investigating the topic.
This review was originally posted on my blog.
Displaying 1 - 15 of 15 reviews