PMQs (Oct 21st) Badenoch vs Burnham Part 1
Statement 1
“Last week I asked the Prime Minister to stop faffing about, so can I thank him for finally approving the Jackdaw gasfield? [Hon. Members: “Hear, hear!”] I notice that there were no cheers from Members on the Government Benches. The Conservatives first approved Jackdaw in 2022. Rather than fighting the leftie activists who tried to block it, Labour appointed one of them as Energy Secretary. So many jobs lost, and so much time and money wasted.”
Initial thoughts
The Leader of the Opposition starts out by extending some appreciation and gratitude. There is a hint that it was her pushing of the Prime Minister that got him to approve the licence.
Claims
Checkable — a record could settle it
- Last week she asked the Prime Minister to stop faffing about.
- He approved the Jackdaw gasfield.
- The Conservatives first approved Jackdaw in 2022.
- Labour appointed one of the activists as Energy Secretary.
- There were no cheers from Members on the Government Benches.
Untestable — a judgement, motive or prediction
- “Faffing about.”
- “Finally” — it presupposes that the delay was unreasonable.
- What the silence from the Government Benches means.
- “So many jobs lost, and so much time and money wasted.”
Presupposition — meaning something without outright saying it
- “So can I thank him” — the word “so” ties her question last week to his approval this week, which hands her the credit for it without her ever claiming it.
- “Rather than fighting the leftie activists who tried to block it, Labour appointed one of them as Energy Secretary.”
Function
The atmosphere of the room was on the Aberfan disaster and issues raised by other MPs. With the injection of the topic of the Jackdaw gasfield, there is a visible divide, as MPs behind her cheer very audibly while there is very little reaction from those sitting behind the Prime Minister. Those in acceptance cheered, while those who did not care or were not in support remained silent. And she mentions this divide: “I notice that there were no cheers from Members on the Government Benches.” The function was to segment the room based on support for the gasfield.
Purpose
The purpose is to point to the fact that the delay and opposition by Labour in approving the Jackdaw gasfield has cost the country so many jobs and resources, and that the approval should have come earlier, just as the Conservatives had done.
Analysis
“Faffing about” gives the sense that the Prime Minister needs pushing and cajoling. “Can I thank him” has a double meaning, in that she is thanking him for doing his job and for what she deems the right thing in approving the licence. But it is coming four years after the Conservatives approved it.
She then paints the picture that the Labour Party has been holding back the approval, which has led to “so many jobs lost, and so much time and money wasted.” The Prime Minister, by extension, might have been toeing that line until now that he has approved the Jackdaw gasfield.
She could easily have said that people in Labour had tried to block the approval of the Jackdaw gasfield. Instead she labelled the group as lefties, and there is a deeper meaning than her just calling them lefties. I think it is a bid to show that their refusal was hurting the country, and that Labour further appointed one of these lefties as Energy Secretary. First, what is the definition of a lefty, and what proof is there that the Energy Secretary is one? It is a verifiable task to see whether the Energy Secretary was opposed to the Jackdaw gasfield, but she presupposes that this would disqualify him from the post without ever arguing for it.
Statement 2
“Britain cannot be a serious player on the world stage if the Government dither for two and a half years over approving a single licence. We have the resources, the expertise and the people; what we have lost is the confidence to make tough decisions. Will the Prime Minister now overturn Labour’s ban on all new oil and gas licences?”
Claims
Checkable — a record could settle it
- “Britain cannot be a serious player on the world stage if the Government dither for two and a half years over approving a single licence.” This is checkable if the criterion is how long it takes countries to approve gasfield licences.
- “We have the resources, the expertise and the people.” This is also checkable, to see whether Britain has the natural resources and the people to work and manage gasfields.
- “Will the Prime Minister now overturn Labour’s ban on all new oil and gas licences?” This is checkable if there is an official record of Labour banning the approval of new oil and gas licences.
- “Two and a half years.” This is checkable against the record, and it is worth noting that in Statement 1 she dated the first approval to 2022, which is four years ago.
Untestable — a judgement, motive or prediction
- “Britain cannot be a serious player on the world stage if the Government dither for two and a half years over approving a single licence.” This is untestable because it does not take into account all the factors that go into the approval, or any legal or environmental roadblocks and pushbacks. It also assumes that the approval process for all “serious players on the world stage” is the same.
- “What we have lost is the confidence to make tough decisions.” This is not testable, as it is a generalisation. Tough decisions are a daily part of running a government, so her lack of specificity makes this untestable. And if the tough decision she is referring to is the approval of gasfields, the Jackdaw one was just approved.
Presupposition — meaning something without outright saying it
- “What we have lost is the confidence to make tough decisions.”
- “Will the Prime Minister now overturn Labour’s ban on all new oil and gas licences?”
The thread between these two claims, which is not said, is that Labour is unwilling to take the actions needed to help Britain maintain or pull itself back as a serious player on the world stage, because of its refusal and delays in approving new oil and gas licences, which in turn has led to a waste of natural and human resources.
“Now” also does quiet work. It only makes sense if something has just changed, which turns the single Jackdaw approval into a precedent and asks him to be consistent with it.
Function
The room before this statement was the cheering and the silence over the approval of the Jackdaw gasfield licence. With this statement she injects the idea that the silence from those MPs is a result of them opposing the approval and agreeing with the supposed Labour ban, and that this approval is in the best interest of Britain.
Two things also enter the room already settled. The ban arrives as an agreed fact with an agreed description, rather than as a policy anyone might describe differently. And the standard of what a serious country does arrives as common sense, rather than as something she has just set herself. Neither is open for debate by the time the question lands.
Purpose
The purpose is to paint a systematic and structural view of Labour as opposed to the approval of oil and gas fields, and to argue that this opposition is costing the country not just in terms of jobs and resources but also in its standing in the global rankings, and that the Prime Minister might be toeing the line of his party rather than taking a stand for the betterment of Britain.
Analysis
“Britain cannot be a serious player on the world stage if the Government dither for two and a half years over approving a single licence.” This essentially means that today Britain is not a serious player on the world stage, because it takes two and a half years to approve a single licence. But it does not take into account all the factors that go into the approval, or any legal or environmental roadblocks and pushbacks. It also assumes that the approval process for all “serious players on the world stage” is the same. What makes a country a serious player on the world stage?
Note too that she never actually asserts that Britain is not serious. The conditional carries it. She states the rule, the room supplies the premise, and the conclusion arrives without her being on record saying it.
“Will the Prime Minister now overturn Labour’s ban on all new oil and gas licences?” This implies that the Prime Minister is complicit as a member of Labour, and that he has the power and authority to remove bans on oil and gas fields. But she does not say how the ban came into effect, and oil and gas approval is a lengthy process.
It is also a loaded question. Yes means there is a ban, it is Labour’s, and he has just reversed his own party. No means there is a ban, it is Labour’s, and he is choosing to keep it. Either way the premise stands.