Now we no longer hear John Prescott's Les Dawson routine (thank goodness) at the end of the Labour conference, the undisputed king of Westminster's northern stand-up comedians is William Hague.

As the Register of Members' Interests confirms, the former Tory leader charges up to £20,000 a turn for his jokes on the after dinner speaking circuit.

But as MPs in the Commons debated the Bill to ratify the Lisbon treaty, we got to hear William's wisecracks, gags and mockery of Gordon Brown and the Government for nowt, as they say in Yorkshire.

Predictably, Hague ridiculed the Prime Minister for turning up late for the signing of the treaty last month and for not turning up at all to vote for it in Parliament.

But he saved the best until last. His lampooning of Tony Blair's apparent bid to become the new EU president, a grand new post created by the treaty, was hilarious and had MPs across the chamber howling and roaring with laughter.

Don't take my word for it. Watch it for yourself here:

The trouble is, just like when he was Tory leader, Hague's jokes were good but his policy is a muddle.

First, the Conservatives blundered by not putting their name to the rebel Labour amendment calling for a referendum on the treaty.

That meant that because the amendment was backed by only 24 MPs (18 Labour and six from the minor parties) the Speaker didn't select it to be voted on at the end of the second reading debate on the Bill.

Second, some senior Tories like Kenneth Clarke rather like the treaty and don't like the idea of a referendum. "I am pro-European, as everyone here knows," Clarke told MPs as he announced that he would vote for the Bill.

(I spotted Wee Willie on the Opposition front bench shuffling uncomfortably and fidgeting as Ken rubbished Tory opposition to the treaty.)

And third, Hague and his boss David Cameron are all over the place when asked what they would do if they win the next election and the Lisbon Treaty had already been ratified.

All over the place and in a muddle? Another thing William Hague has in common with John Prescott.

Comments

[Hugh, Kirkcaldy, Fife 5 Mar 2008 22:34:23]

For heavens sake we live in a dictorial society, where we have no say in the future of our country, nation, as the so called leaders of our nation pass over responsibilities to a group of un elected face less morons in Europe. So much for the promised REFERENDUM labour. The Lid Dems or should that be the LOST DEMISE party, who hwole heartedly stood against this avenue ABSTAINED. Why?. Its because they don't want to spend their political life in the wilderness. Proportional representation, How? when you can't even vote. Get lost, your political careers are finished.

[The Morning Post 23 Jan 2008 13:20:16]

Anyone who thinks that British people are unconcerned about the contents of the Lisbon treaty, specifically qualified majority voting which renders our own house of commons defunct in many instances, is living in cloud cockoo land! This is a major constitutional shift which should not pass through the Commons on a nod and a wink, particuarly as this government were elected having promised a referendum on this matter! I believe that Browns mendacity will return to haunt him and New Labour sooner rather than later!

[Chris, Baildon 23 Jan 2008 11:46:29]

Effie

Thanks for your points re 1992 election. You made some valid ones.

The reason I'm sticking with '92 is the shock factor.

People expected Labour to win in 1992 - until the first results came in. I can still remember the BBC and ITV exit polls showing a Labour victory (by up to 20 seats I think) - and been drastically down graded once the first result came in.

Whereas in 2001, a large Labour win was always expected - although the margin was greater then anticipated.

[Victor, NW Kent 23 Jan 2008 11:42:22]

Yes Effie - two rather political journalists - Kevin Maguire [ a Labour cheerleader] and David Davies who spent 24 years at the BBC [nuff said] and who has also become a Labour-slanted journalist, very conspicuously so since Brown took the throne.

I am pleased that Cameron has some steel about him and that he can get tough when it suits him - he needs it to deal with Brown. If you aren't tough you have no place leading a political party.

And, if the "people of this country" see no problem with the financially and morally corrupt EU then they are no longer British, if those people ever were.

Yes, I was full of doubts about what was going on in the Conservative Party -I reserve the right to criticise any politician or Party. Now that they have stopped pandering to left-wing "bampots" and started talking commonsense and reality they will obviously become more popular.

I wonder what questions Brown will ask of Cameron at PMQ's today?

[T.J. from Ireland 23 Jan 2008 10:29:06]

Everybody should move to Ireland, the land of 'Milk & Honey', Poteen, brown envelopes and dodgy donations for politicians.
Oh yes,and the opportunity to hold a referendum!

[Robert, Scotland 23 Jan 2008 09:43:47]

I believe the only winners out of the Liberal Democrat Leader's decision to wholeheartedly support the Government in voting down calls for a referendum on acceptance of the Lisbon Treaty (nee: Constitution) will be the Conservatives.
Nick Clegg has been a member, now Leader, of a Political Party that for years has beat the drum for proportional representation from votes cast in a General election, a referendum is the purest reflection of this.
Instead Nick Clegg rallies his troops to support a Government who were installed on the undemocratic first past the post system, based on boundary lines that favours New Labour over all other Parties. Favours them that much, that 38% of all votes cast in a General election keeps them in power with a comfortable working majority.
I always keep an open mind on which Political party to support, but on this issue I have to conclude, vote Liberal Democrat to ensure the continuance of New Labour in Government.

[Effie 23 Jan 2008 09:09:04]

Perhaps the guarantee to hold a EU referendum helped them.

Victor, I do not think the people of this Country place so much emphasis on Europe as you and the Right Wing Bampots seem to think.
That is where the Tories keep making their mistakes.
I think it is you who is in for the rude awakening.
You have only become so cocky since Cameron's rise in the polls, you were full of doubt before.
Last night for the very first time, I actually listened on Sky to two Journalists mention how Nasy Cameron was and could be.
And for the first time ever, they mentioned that all Cameron and Osborne seem to have was a character assasination of Brown.
They also said that the Brititsh People do not like that sort of thing.
I ask you how long have I been saying that?
His chickens are now coming home to roost .

[Effie 23 Jan 2008 08:57:08]

The only scripts written here by this government are fairystories... Elizabeth Davies Cape Town 23 Jan 2008 08:12:59

Violet Elizabeth..you and the Tory's are the only people living in Alice in Wonderland.
I would think with your insight in politics you perhaps would feel more at home on CBBC.

[Elizabeth Davies Cape Town 23 Jan 2008 08:12:59]

The only scripts written here by this government are fairystories...
There was this good loooking prince who ruled the land of Britain. Along came a black knight who stole Britain out of his grasp. The black knight then went on a rampage to scare all the citizens out of their wits and steal all their money, sorry no happy ever after until the 2010 election when the new order will come into force.

[Victor, NW Kent 22 Jan 2008 20:53:55]

Peter in Fife

I am not persuaded by others' errors in thinking or recording. The site you refer to contains all of the audited accounts of the Ashford Conservative Association since 2002 - the Electoral Commission had no remit before then. Nowhere in those accounts does the word "Unionist" occur. The Conservative and Unionist Party does not exist. The Register of Parties includes many defunct parties, single interest parties and so forth without mentioning Blair's New Labour.

The Electoral Commission is yet another almost toothless and apparently useless quango given birth by Labour. It costs almost as much to run annually, despite the paucity of its output, than the entire amount spent on the last General Election by all parties combined.

During its quite short life the Commission has had proof of many electoral frauds,deficiencies, uncounted ballots, "lost" ballot boxes, illegal postal voting and the calamitous Scottish elections recently. It appears to have been singularly paralysed in response to almost all of those and few prosecutions have occurred - indeed, at least two such successful prosecutions were instigated privately and carried through by the police and CPS. You might and I certainly do, consider it to be a £2-million a month buck-passing quango.

[Khalid 22 Jan 2008 20:49:17]

Listening to William Hague next to "Paul Young" at times likes this you have to say "Come Back & Stay".

[Effie 22 Jan 2008 19:24:01]

As for my vote for the worst result in living memory - I would say 1992

Chris, Baildon 22 Jan 2008 17:33:01

The reason I would not agree with you on that point was two fold.
The first being a lot of people were of the opinion that Kinnock was not up to the job, and although they did have a lot of respect for John Smith, they were still not quite certain.
At the back of everybody's mind there was still the luny left.
Next, oppositions in this Country do not as a rule win elections, it is usually for Governments to loose them.
The British are reluctant to oust any government.
This is what makes me feel so strongly that Cameron will not win.
As for how many individual votes any party wins it does not matter to the results as they have fought on first past the post for as long as I can remember.
Win or loose that is how they go into the election, so no good griping about the result.
It worked for Tories in the past and they were content with it then.
Why change the goal post now?
Bear in mind that at one point hardly anybody in Scotland and Wales voted for Tory. This was know as the Doomsday Scenario and Thatcher and Major almost achieved that fete.

[Victor, NW Kent 22 Jan 2008 18:14:22]

Effie

I see that your opinions become "fact" whilst my concrete facts are regarded by you as simply my opinion.

One of the more sinister aspects of Blairism was the ability to demand that any fact or statement made should be considered in such a way that a new dictionary would have been created. It is now a significant tool in the Brownist arsenal - anything can be denied, any statement can be twisted to mean something else. Any problem is either because the Tories opposed it or because they supported it.

Nothing about Labour is true, all is illusion.

In 2001 there was no reason to expect the Conservatives to do well. Blair's smoke and mirrors were holding up well. Exactly why Labour won the 2005 election is a mystery after the public had been betrayed over Iraq, bamboozled about Afghanistan, fooled about public transport "policy". Perhaps the guarantee to hold a EU referendum helped them. Perhaps it was Michael Howard's link with the Major era.

The voters, or about 68% of them, are now able to comprehend Labour's inability to be truthful about anything at all, keep any data safe, make any promise that is likely to be fulfilled or avoid spending far beyond our means.

So, never mind past elections, watch out for the next one. Your chickens will come home to roost.

[Craig Hants 22 Jan 2008 18:08:32]

Iam going to cut taxes and listen to the british people.The economy is great,inflation is 2%,unemployment is down,we have never been better off. ask Peter Hain.

[Chris, Baildon 22 Jan 2008 17:33:01]

Effie

It might be your view that the 2001 (not 2002) general election was the worst in living memory.

As the Tory share of the vote was up, their number of seats (just) was up, the Labour share of the vote was down - I would not agree that it was the worst general election in living memory - that is my view (not a fact).

The Tories did do very badly - and William Hague resigned. he was too young and up against the best politician for 20 years, will a stable economy, and some good policies (some borrowed from the Tories).

And then along came Iraq.....

As for my vote for the worst result in living memory - I would say 1992. The Tories were in a mess, the economy was in a mess, and Labour still could not win "Well Alright!" Effie - that is my view - not a fact - and I am happy to discuss it.

[Peter, Fife 22 Jan 2008 16:53:44]

Victor,

If you search beyond the Home page of the Electoral commission you will arrive at the following details:

Conservative and Unionist Party accounting units
Statement of accounts

When you browse the hyperlinks you will find one for Ashford, now where exactly in Scotland is Ashford?

The Electoral Commission seem to think that all Conservatives are still Conservative and Unionists.

[Madnurse 22 Jan 2008 16:52:45]

Here's what a stepford minister said: (Source Sky News)

In a speech to the New Local Government Network, Ms Blears said: "People rightly expect a good standard of service and redress when things go wrong.

"When trains are delayed, they know they are entitled to refunds or compensation."

I hope now that this clears the way for the people of this country to get our massive tax payments back from this under performing government.
Actually no it doesn't as the government has no money of it's own and has spent all ours.

Now I am sure the Stepford supporters will harp on about ten or so years ago, but our party never suggested such a stupid thing.
And to think that you suggest Mr Hague is good on the jokes, this gem from Ms Blears nearly made we wet my knickers.Lol

[Effie 22 Jan 2008 16:05:55]

A useful sneer but predictably innacurate - it was a poor performance but he actually had one seat more than in 1997.

Posted by: Victor, NW Kent 22 Jan 2008 11:16:36

Oh Yes Victor, I did know that (sneer) bad choice of wor).
The reason I say he led his Party to the biggest defeat ever is this.
Everybody expected the Tories to loose by a large ammount in 1997.
What nobody expected was their would still be the same landslide by 2002.
EVERYBODY expected the Tories to have regained a bit of ground, it turned out another rout.
That is what I mean by the biggest defeat, any half decent leader would have done better and turned his party around after nearly 5 years of an opposition party in power.
Even Labour at its worst never suffered as bad as that.
Hence I will keep repeating he had the biggest loss in living memory.
Not a sneer a fact.

[The Morning bPost 22 Jan 2008 14:29:24]

J Courtney

With the Lib Debs rabid Europhiles and a large New Lab majority in the house, nobody, least of all those you mention in your post, expected anything but a government victory on this issue. The decision to ignore the majority of Brits who want a referendum on this Treaty and your parties deceit in promising one in its 2005 election manifesto and denying one when elected, will aslo come back to haunt it, sooner rather than later! Who in 2010, or whenever Gordon plucks up the courage to go to the country, will believe a word New Lab politicans say in that manifesto? No plans to raise tax at all! Lies. No plans to introduce student top up fees! Lies. Referendum guaranteed on psuedo EU Constitutional Treaty! Lies. The British electorate will not be fooled or lied to again i promise you!

[J Courtney Birmingham 22 Jan 2008 14:01:39]

The Tories and William, the Clown, Hague had been looking forward to the EU Treaty debated for months. They had their sabres at the ready and waited to slay the Treaty. Expecting a ground swell of public and news print support they strode into the chamber with the smell of victory in their nostrils. However Hague made a few jokes and their collective attacks resembled a flee trying to molest an elephant. Very very poor opposition.

[Victor, NW Kent 22 Jan 2008 13:15:06]

Peter in Fife

The Electoral Commission describes the names of parties that took part in the 2001 & 2005 Parliamentary Elections. The Conservative party is described as just that. It is only in Scotland that the addition of Unionist is used. That party is independent of the Conservative Party. You will not be allowed to get away with these little terminological inexactitudes whilst I am around.

As for trying to bring me to order, I discussed nothing that you did not mention originally. You are getting above yourself and believe like other Labs that you own this blog.

[Peter, Fife 22 Jan 2008 12:19:07]

Victor,

You should check out the Electoral Commission if you think the Conservative and Unionist Party no longer exists.

Almost without exception in my opinion the vast majority of contributors to all political parties expect some form of kickback mostly clandestinely delivered within the policies which the supported parties pursue; the word which does not spring readily to mind when discussing such investors is philanthropy, they are all in it for what they can get out of it.

The subject of this thread is William Hague and the Conservative party.

[Brian Christley. Abergele 22 Jan 2008 12:01:01]

Nick Clegg who was only seven when Britain voted ‘yes’ in the Common Market Referendum, now tells us that unless we accept his version of Europe we should, after 33 years, do a U-turn and vote to leave Europe. Instant politicians (like Nick) are like instant mashed potatoes - nothing like the real thing, turn in to mush when they get into hot water and are best left in their wrapping at the back of the cupboard.

[Philip, Bristol 22 Jan 2008 11:54:33]

Great act. Great value if we had to pay for it..well worth £20K. It's only 10 taxpayers X what they have put into the Rock after all.

Anyone at Sky going to Blog about Black Monday are has that been expunged from memory already. It only happened yesterday chaps.

I am dying to hear whose fault it was...either anyone but the UK (Global forces) or if that doesn't work Cameron's Tories cos he was in the treasury years ago. We all know whose fault it won't be don't we children???

[Victor, NW Kent 22 Jan 2008 11:16:36]

Peter in Fife

Like all Labs you love to dwell in the past. However, and you have raised this many times here, you may wish to know that the Conservatives and Unionists split in 1973. As that is 34 years ago can you drop the subject? The name has not fallen into disfavour - it would no longer be accurate.

You voice another piece of partisan absurdity when you say "The proof of business ‘owning’ the Conservative party is clearly detailed in the list of their major financial donors".

So we may presume that Lords Sainsbury and Paul together with such as the Mittal brothers and Sir Ronald Cohen own the Labour party - or perhaps just the part that does not belong to the TUC. Or that Peter Hain is owned by the various businessmen who gave him baksheesh when he was unable to meet his electioneering bills.

Effie

You also react to the mention of William Hague's name with the same knee-jerk statement, always, namely that he led the Tories to their biggest ever election defeat in 2001. A useful sneer but predictably innacurate - it was a poor performance but he actually had one seat more than in 1997.

[Effie 22 Jan 2008 11:16:03]

The single vote of Ken Clarke is of no importance - I think that appearing at EU debates is his sole function in Parliament Victor, NW Kent 21 Jan 2008 22:27:26

Ken Clarke was the only person at yesterday's debate on Northern Rock who made any sense at all from the Tories.
He was the only one who seemed to have joined up thinking. Osborne and the remainder who asked questions were all over the place.
Hague did manage to give Gideon some good one liners..but dull Darling had a better script writer yesterday and came back with a few brammers himself.

[T. England 22 Jan 2008 11:10:57]

It wont be a joke when these MPs dont have a shred of power left!
I will also laugh & then cry when the big businesses that have pushed our weak politicians to this point relize the Britain they need to contiunue is no more!!
I wonder what place big bisiness will wreck next?

[Madnurse 22 Jan 2008 11:08:04]

Now, had an "unbiased" reporter dared to write such a "balanced" story about the Stepford supporter's party there would have been uproar.

Although Mr Hague was taking a comical line on the issue, there is a lot of truth in the saying, many a true word spoken in jest.

I personally feel Mr Hague was not ready for the leadership of the party at the time he was our leader, however now I think he is and I for one would welcome him as a replacement for Mr Cameron when the rest of my party see sense.

I believe it was traitorous to give away our country to a EUSSR but I would never expect anything different from such an anti British and in particular anti English Party as the current Labour Party.

I bet many of my generation are turning in their graves, not just because of the way our country has been sold out to Europe, but also because of the direction the Labour Party has taken itself away from it's core beliefs and principles; well done Mr Blair.

[Effie 22 Jan 2008 10:22:58]

Had the electorate wanted a comedian in Downing Street in 2005 when Hague was leader, personally I would have prefered Ken Dodd.
However Comedian Hague led the "Diddy Men and Women" to the biggest Conservative defeat in living memory.
For all his Jokes and great one-lineres last night he led the "Diddy People" into another defeat.
Quite a fete to accomplish from one Joker in the pack.

And as you say Jon:
The trouble is, just like when he was Tory leader, "Hague's jokes were good but his policy is a muddle."
Nothing has changed.

Dave's and Giddy's faces were a picture on the clip above and at the end of the debate they were both laughing at the other side of their faces.
Just as they did in the earlier debate on Northern Rock.
What a shower!!!

[The Morning Post 22 Jan 2008 10:22:54]

All over the place Jon! Hardly! It was'nt the Tory Party who campaigned at election after election on a ticket of total withdrawal from Europe not so long ago but Blair and many of his cohorts who remain in office to this day including Gordon Brown! Yesterday was a very sad day for this country. Treachery in Parliament and yet more death and maimed British soldiers in Afganistan. I sincerely hope that the Tory's when elected, will revisit both this psuedo EU Constitution and our continued involvement in Afganistan. At least we now know, compliments of our parttime Defence Secretary, that we will only be fighting in Afganistan for a decade or two more. We will however be ruled by Brussels much much longer than that but with equally disasterous results!

[Peter, Fife 22 Jan 2008 09:54:59]

It is clear from William Hague’s monologue that gossip and rumour combined with articles in Sunday newspapers remains their Party’s main source of information; is it not a pity that their main source of income cannot provide them with more accurate research, or is there a reality that they share a common source of gossip with their main benefactors?

All this proves is the Conservatives have the best comedian.

[Peter Chuah, Birmingham 22 Jan 2008 09:30:48]

Interesting, thought provoking speech. Who is all over the place?

[Peter, Fife 22 Jan 2008 08:34:55]

The old splits in the bipolar Conservative party are showing through yet again, breaching as they do those much celebrated leadership efforts that have been employed in temporarily plastering over of the publicly visible cracks; the European dimension is the Achilles heel of the Conservative party, one area where the divide is clear for all to witness, especially when deliberation on any European policy is moved into the Commons’ debating chamber and to that horror of horrors for the Conservative leadership, the division lobby.

The title of the Conservative and Unionist Party, which currently seems to be out of favour, seem a more fitting description of the party rather than the original concept of the Union of the Crowns; the Conservative party is clearly united and divided on a single point or issue that of wealth creation for business and the perceived threat to that wealth creation from the policies of the European Union.

Edward Heath led the march into the European Community in 1973 and was closely followed and supported by business who perceived there was a killing to be made, when the reality of exports from the EC into the UK which threatened the cosy home markets of these companies became a reality there were cries of foul; clearly a Conservative weakness that extends even into today’s Conservative party of poor research and failing to read the small print.

The proof of business ‘owning’ the Conservative party is clearly detailed in the list of their major financial donors, donors who may be called many things but philanthropic is not the adjective which is most commonly employed; business is important to our economy but because so much of our industry has been sold off to foreign ownership the wealth creation is now most commonly siphoned abroad; shareholder dividends being the bribe offered for continued support for the status quo.

Is it not a pity for the Conservatives that their stand up comedian who currently is number one in their listing of failed party leaders is reduced to writing gags for the Conservatives front man David Cameron; if William Hague was a truly committed ‘party man’ he would employ his skills as a party fund raiser instead of raising funds merely for his own coffers; how would such income from their own comedy club be declared in their accounts?

[Eddie Allen 22 Jan 2008 07:35:40]

That's a bit steep Jon !

"All over the place" ?
Where exactly is he 'all over' ?

The debate to ratisfy a treaty which was promised by Labour and on which it gained the vote of about a quarter of the electorate because obviously the rest of us NEVER believed them is hardly a mandate to sign away our sovereign rights to Europe !

In the debating chamber the government and Liberals have the numbers to get it through. What would YOU do then when faced with the question 2 years at least beforehand "What will you do about it in government" ?

Would you a) Give an answer and let Labour have the next 2 years to do the escapre trick to ruin that plan, or b) Keep your gob shut ?

William Hague was extremely funny though, and I think it's good that at least one side of the house (Austen Mitchell excepted), has humour. But he's intelligent enough to make sure that the joke will be on Labour and not the Tories.

Unlike the misery party opposite which is having a joke on us which isn't that funny is it !?

Steamrollers and iron fists never did make me laugh but wit and charm usually do.

[Ben (Northampton) 21 Jan 2008 23:14:49]

Genius.

[Victor, NW Kent 21 Jan 2008 22:27:26]

The real question is what could they legally do if the Constitutional Treaty has already been ratified since Labour has not kept its word about a referendum?

Supporting the 24 Labour MPs was going nowhere as the LimpDems are also supporting the Treaty.

The single vote of Ken Clarke is of no importance - I think that appearing at EU debates is his sole function in Parliament.

Even the debate is of no real purpose as the matter is already resolved by the anti-Union parties who wish Britain, most particularly England, to be subservient to Europe.

Blair rushed into this on a vague promise that he would get the Presidency - the Germans and French suckered him as they would never permit a British President, not even a Scot.

[Laurie Escreet 21 Jan 2008 20:32:00]

Comparing William Hague with John Prescott is ludricous.
Hague talks English, keeps his hands off the secretary, and never threws a punch at a voter.
Get real.