PMQs (Oct 28th) Badenoch vs Burnham Part 2
Statement 2a
“There is no confusion at all. The Government have a collectively agreed position, which I have set out today. It is entirely consistent with everything I have said, including what I said at the time of the by-election.”
Claims
Checkable — a record could settle it
- “The Government have a collectively agreed position, which I have set out today.”
- “It is entirely consistent with everything I have said, including what I said at the time of the by-election.”
Untestable — a judgement, motive or prediction
- “There is no confusion at all.” This is untestable for the same reason that her initial question is untestable: what exactly is there no confusion about? Is it the question she asked? His position on the question? The Government’s position on the topic?
- “It is entirely consistent with everything I have said, including what I said at the time of the by-election.”
Function
The function of this statement is for the Prime Minister to take back control of the room, first by replying to her claim that there was confusion with “there is no confusion at all,” and second by stating his point.
Purpose
The Prime Minister is hoping to ensure that his position is seen as clear and consistent with his previous statements.
Analysis
Both the Prime Minister and Mrs Badenoch use the word confusion, but neither of them states explicitly what it is there is confusion about. From his statement, he does not answer the question, and he does not fall into the binary trap that her question lays for him. Rather, he points her and anyone else to the position that his Government has agreed on, and says that it matches what he has said before. But he does not state what it is that he has said that would match the Government’s agreed position.
Statement 2b
“The red lines in our manifesto, including those on freedom of movement, will stay firmly in place for the whole of this Parliament, but what I will not do is defend the deal negotiated by the right hon. Lady and the Government she was in, which, in my view, gave us a harder Brexit than was promised at the referendum, and has been bad for growth and bad for control of immigration.”
Claims
Checkable — a record could settle it
- “The red lines in our manifesto, including those on freedom of movement.”
Untestable — a judgement, motive or prediction
- “Will stay firmly in place for the whole of this Parliament.”
Presupposition — meaning something without outright saying it
- “What I will not do is defend the deal negotiated by the right hon. Lady and the Government she was in, which has been bad for growth and bad for control of immigration.”
Function
The function is to provide more detail on his position. This statement makes available the option to attack the previous Government, which he does, and it points to the fact that Mrs Badenoch was a member of that Government.
Purpose
The same purpose as Statement 2a, but with this statement he also reframes the conversation to include what he refers to as the failures of the previous Government.
Analysis
Nobody asked him to “defend the deal negotiated by the right hon. Lady and the Government she was in.” By stating this, he goes on the offensive and lays the blame on the previous Government, while still not answering the question of whether he wants a referendum on rejoining the European Union.