Live blog

VERDICT: What began as a measured affair, with polite questions from Miliband about Libya and the Defence establishment, effervesced into something more dramatic. I was surprised Miliband didn’t concentrate on the rising cost of living; rather, he chipped at the local government funding settlement. By concentrating on examples of Tory-led council intransigence, Miliband did not appear to be being overtly partisan. By contrast, Cameron was initially far too eager to political points: twice he raised Nottingham Council’s refusal to publish details of its pay structure when the issue was irrelevant. Eventually though, he struck the right tone by attacking council waste and politicking per se. Sure, things are not easy

VERDICT: It was, comparatively, a quieter session than last week. Miliband was not as effective and missed the bus on the forestry u-turn. His attack on the government’s growth agenda was more spirited (Miliband is better with statistics than jokes). Even so, he concentrated on youth unemployment, which has been a long-term problem in Britain. Therefore, it doesn’t work as a critique of government policy. This is a very difficult time for the government and for Cameron personally; he will be relieved then to have emerged from PMQs largely unscathed. More worrying for Cameron, there was a hangover from last week’s 5 hostile Tory backbench questions, particularly on the issue

VERDICT: What a refreshing change that was. After several weeks of Punch ‘n’ Judy rivalry, the two party leaders finally put down their batons and stumbled upon a new way to do it. Much of the credit must go to Ed Miliband, for asking pacific questions about Egypt and Afghanistan in the first place. But credit, also, to Cameron, for answering them in a straightforward and statesmanlike manner. The rest of the House, for its part, was stunned into silence by this peculiar scene. Some of the blood rushed back into proceedings with the backbench questions, and as Cameron directed attacks at Ed Balls, but this must still go down

VERDICT: Ed Miliband had it all, going into today’s PMQs: weak growth figures, the uncertain demise of control orders, rising youth unemployment, and more. And yet, somehow, he let most of it go to waste. Barely any of his attacks stuck – or, for that matter, stick in the mind – and Cameron rebuffed them with surprising ease. It helped that the Prime Minister seemed more comprehensively briefed than usual, with a decent compliment of statistics, and one or two sharp lines, at his disposal. (Although, measuring by the Labour cheers, I doubt he will thank Jacob Rees-Mogg for invoking Thatcher immediately after his exchange with the Labour leader.) In

VERDICT: No winners, and no real losers, from this week’s PMQs. Miliband’s questions were insistent and straightforward. Cameron’s answers were forceful and, in themselves, fairly persuasive. A no-score draw, then, if you want to look at it like that. There were one or two worrying leitmotifs for the coalition, though. First, the PM’s tendency towards grouchiness under fire; far less pronounced than it was last week, but still present. And then the continuing absence of any clear explanation of the NHS reforms, beyond “well, we had to change what was there previously.” The PM has a point about cancer survival rates and the like, but he’s not yet setting out

VERDICT: Woah. If you ever needed a PMQs to brush away the last morsels of festive cheer, then this was it. Every question and answer came laced with some sideswipe or other, and it made for a scrappy exchange between the two party leaders. Both struck blows against each other, but both were also guilty of errors and mis-steps. Miliband squandered an easy attack on bankers’ bonuses, even allowing Cameron to turn it back against Labour. While, for his part, the Prime Minister was so relentlessly personal that it came across as unstatesmanlike. I don’t think either one really emerged victorious, or well, to be honest. It was simply unedifiying

VERDICT: Tuition fees, tuition fees, tuition fees. Ed Miliband used only one weapon from his armoury today – but it served him unexpectedly well. The Labour leader scraped a contest that, as usual, offered far more heat than light. His attacks were slightly more cutting, his one-liners that little bit more memorable, and it was all the more remarkable given his dreadful performance seven days ago. It wasn’t that Cameron performed badly. The PM rightly – and, at times, effectively – pointed out Labour’s hypocrisy on this issue. But it all seemed a little flat, as though he was reading from a script that had only just been handed to

VERDICT: A freewheeling, swashbuckling sort of performance from Cameron today, that was encapsulated by a single line: “I’d rather be a Child of Thatcher than a Son of Brown”. Sure, that may not go down too well with lefty Lib Dems nor, indeed, many Scottish voters. But, in the context of PMQs, it was a rapier response to Ed Miliband’s sclerotic lines of questioning. Why the Labour leader chose to completely ignore today’s Mervyn King quotes, and sift unpersuasively through the footnotes of the OBR report, I’m not sure. In any case, the plan didn’t work at all. This was yet another PMQs which generated more heat than light, but

VERDICT: Perhaps the snappiest exchange between Cameron and Miliband so far, with both men on combative form. Miliband’s charge was that, from tuition fees to child benefit, the coalition is breaking promises that it made before the election. And Cameron’s counter was that he has had to take tough action to deal with the mess that Labour left behind, and that Ed Miliband has nothing to offer to that process other than kneejerk opposition. As exchanges across the dispatch box go, that’s pretty standard stuff – but at least it was packaged with some wit (although little real insight) today. A score draw. 1232: And that’s it. My short verdict

VERDICT: Well, who would have thought it? In his first PMQs performance, Ed Miliband not only put in a solid showing – but he got the better of David Cameron. I certainly don’t agree with the Labour leader’s central argument: that it is unfair to restrict child benefit. But he put his point across in measured, reasonable tones – and Cameron seemed flustered by comparison, as he wagged on about the size of the deficit. Make no mistake, the argument and the public’s sympathies will unwind themselves over the course of the entire Parliament. They will not be resolved in one session of PMQs. But in presentational terms, MiliE will

1522, PH: We’ll leave it there. More reaction on Coffee House shortly. 1520, PH: And there’s the closing summary. He manages to squeeze “new generation” and “optimists” in several times. Then, a standing ovation, natch. 1519, PH: Weird blip as Miliband says that he wants to take on “David … Cameron”. Did he have another rival called “David” in mind? 1518, PH: A bit of life to the speech now, as Miliband takes on the Red Ed label. “Come of it,” he swipes, “let’s debate the issues that matter to Britain.” 1518, FN: A huge sigh of relief in Tory HQ, I suspect, as he says he supports Ken Clarke’s

1653, PH: And that, aside from Clegg’s stroll around the crowd, is that. There’ll be further analysis on Coffee House shortly. The applause continues… 1652, PH: Clegg ends with a flourish: “Stick with us, and we will change Britain for good.” The crowd is on its feet. 1651, PH: Is Clegg moulding his party as the party of coalition? He says that the next few years may make the case of “liberal, pluralist politics”. 1650, PH: Clegg says that if AV triumphs in the referendum next year, then “the clapped-out system of first-past-the-post will be gone for good.” 1648, PH: A return to the theme of the beginning of the