The Sketch: Simon Carr
Prescott a victim of verbal slurpee? Now that is clear
Your support helps us to tell the story
From reproductive rights to climate change to Big Tech, The Independent is on the ground when the story is developing. Whether it's investigating the financials of Elon Musk's pro-Trump PAC or producing our latest documentary, 'The A Word', which shines a light on the American women fighting for reproductive rights, we know how important it is to parse out the facts from the messaging.
At such a critical moment in US history, we need reporters on the ground. Your donation allows us to keep sending journalists to speak to both sides of the story.
The Independent is trusted by Americans across the entire political spectrum. And unlike many other quality news outlets, we choose not to lock Americans out of our reporting and analysis with paywalls. We believe quality journalism should be available to everyone, paid for by those who can afford it.
Your support makes all the difference.Angela Browning once questioned John Prescott when he was standing in for the Prime Minister. She asked: "The Chancellor's five tests for joining the euro. What are they?"
It was like putting an egg whisk into Mr Prescott's head and turning it up to "thrash". The Deputy Prime Minister opened his mouth and weirdness poured out; it was like watching ectoplasm swirling into the chamber.
Yesterday it was Michael Ancram's turn. Would the Deputy Prime Minister confirm, he asked, that it was an objective of the war in Afghanistan to remove the Taliban? This produced a slurry of verbal slurpee that Prescott-watchers will treasure for many years.
"Our objectives are clear," he said. "The objectives remain the same and indeed it has been made clear by the Prime Minister in a speech yesterday that the objectives are clear." Is that clear? The clear objectives are clear and that's been made clear by the Government, perhaps under clarity targets set by the Cabinet Office (which Mr Prescott heads).
He continued with a clarification to clarify the clarity of what he was clarifying. "And the one about the removal of the Taliban is not something we have as a clear objective [prolonged laughter] but it is possibly a consequence that will flow from the Tallybin clearly giving protection to bin Laden and the UN resolution made it absolutely clear that anyone that finds them in that position declares themselves an enemy and that clearly is a matter for these objectives."
Mr Prescott is a natural obfuscator, which is why he's no good at it. When you're saying nothing it's important that it sounds like something, and that takes as much art as artifice. For instance, Mr Blair said yesterday: "The end we have is this: al-Qa'ida shut down in Afghanistan; the Taliban regime out." That's clear. So clear that he may not mean it at all.
Maybe Mr Prescott is right after all, and the war aims have indeed changed.
Tory Tim Collins had described him earlier as the most honest member of the Government. Maybe that was what he meant.
Alan Beith, for the Liberal Democrats, noted the Government's U-turns on Railtrack, cannabis, asylum vouchers and student fees, and asked: "Is Labour's second term going to be devoted to undoing the more misguided policies of its first?"
"Change things wrong so it is that we feel we look we whether it's working implemented new policy then we act proper advice cannabis or the things of student financing." Rearrange Mr Prescott's words into a well-known parliamentary answer and find out what the war aims really are. Let me know if you do.
Join our commenting forum
Join thought-provoking conversations, follow other Independent readers and see their replies
Comments