Never has benign and consensual seemed so sinister. There’s lulling someone into a false sense of security and then there’s what Rishi Sunak did to Sir Keir Starmer at Prime Minister’s questions.

It had all started so agreeably, but then so had the spider’s opening invitation to the fly. Mr Sunak, joining Sir Keir in wishing good luck to our Olympians departing for Paris, qualified this by saying: “I might not be the first person they want to hear advice from on how to win.”

Mr Sunak was glad that he and Sir Keir had “maintained a cross-party consensus on important matters of foreign policy.” Thus far, some of Sir Keir’s backbenchers might have thought their leader was maintaining a cross-party consensus on important matters full stop.

What to do about Ukraine, wondered Mr Sunak. This would involve “those decisions which aren’t easy,” he said gently. Would Sir Keir be responsive to Ukraine’s new requests for military assistance?

The PM dutifully ticked them all off: air defence; long-range missiles; speaking to the Germans at the NATO Council; encouraging our allies.

Conservative leader Rishi Sunak speaks during Prime Minister's Questions in the House of Commons, LondonConservative leader Rishi Sunak speaks during Prime Minister's Questions in the House of Commons, London (Image: PA)

Furthermore, he was glad to endorse about “the irreversible path of Ukraine to NATO”, which they both agreed was “a defensive alliance”.

The 20-year occupation of Afghanistan? Libya in 2011. No matter which way you look at a map of the world, neither of these countries is located anywhere near the North Atlantic. The Yugoslav war in 1999?

Mr Sunak was beginning to resemble one of those five-star generals in the West Wing who would urge President Bartlett to bomb everything at the smallest movement on a satellite image. He wanted Sir Keir to “go further on sanctions and seize Russian assets”.

The PM was now beginning to look slightly ill at ease. What was Sunak’s game? Why isn’t he asking some of those questions that would let him bang his fist about the Tories ruining the public finances?

This was beginning to take on the aspect of the Joint Chiefs’ Christmas knees-up at The Rag on St James’s Square: more bombs; more weapons; keep the damned Russkies at bay, put some backbone into the frogs and the krauts. Give them all a damned good thrashing. What?

Mr Sunak welcomed the incoming government’s recent emphasis on the importance of the Tempest fighter jet programme. “It’s a crucial sovereign capability and important for our alliances with Italy and Japan”.

He kindly counselled Sir Keir once more. “In government we had begun initial productive discussions with our friend and ally Saudi Arabia about their desire to potentially join the programme. Will he continue those positive conversations with Saudi Arabia?”

It would be jolly good if he did.

By now, Sir Keir must have twigged that something rum was afoot. Mr Sunak was effectively saying to disappointed Tories: “Look; I told you he was really one of us”.

At last, the penny seemed to be dropping with Sir Keir as he sullenly mumbled something about having just visited Farnborough.

Mr Sunak was now enjoying himself. He’d run rings round the Labour leader during their last election leadership head-to-head and was now getting him to dance to his tune. This opposition malarkey is actually rather good. Maybe he’d been too hasty in declaring his intention to step down.

Read more

He urged the PM to use his prerogative power to quickly respond militarily to protect British national security. “And sometimes without giving this house prior notice.”

As her boss nodded warily, Angela Rayner looked like she was chewing a wasp. I was waiting to hear the air raid sirens.

Military action; protecting our interests; fighter jet programmes; cutting out Parliament from the decision making process; seizing Russian assets; putting the piss and vinegar into the French; strengthening NATO.

Ms Rayner seemed to be looking for a voodoo doll of Mr Sunak. Even Rachel Reeves was beginning to squirm. Soon, she’d be explaining to her backbenches why they couldn’t fund the end of the two-child benefit cap. Now Mr Sunak had effectively bounced his successor into an eye-watering military spending programme. Perhaps the SNP could suggest we impose a two-war spending cap on future military engagements.

If you wanted proof of how little Scotland will feature in anything that goes on here, witness Scottish Lib-Dem leader Christine Jardine’s question. It was about the proposed increase in VAT on private schools and its consequences for Edinburgh’s state schools. We talk of little else up here.

It was left to Stephen Flynn, channelling his Tony Soprano spirit guide, to remind the House that consensus, cosy though it feels, doesn’t butter the parsnips. The SNP’s Westminster leader reminded Sir Keir that Gordon Brown had urged Scottish voters to vote Labour to end child poverty. Yet all Scottish Labour MPS had been “instructed to retain the two child cap which forces children into poverty. What changed, Prime Minister?”

There was to be a task force, said the PM. (No not like the Falklands). There would be breakfast clubs; no-fault evictions; a plan to make work pay. But not a mention of ending the two-child cap any time soon.

You began to feel for the spangly new Scottish Labour MPs, still caught up in their TikTok selfie wonderland. They’d spent the entire election campaign telling everyone that Change was on its way. This had been reinforced by their Scottish Leader Anas Sarwar telling us he’d stand up to Sir Keir on the two-child cap.

Most of them represent those communities worst affected by this most punitively Tory of measures. Friday’s constituency surgeries will be interesting.