STUART TROTTER describes how, in the Prime Minister's absence

yesterday, unfortunate stand-in Tony Newton was thrown to the lions as

MPs concerned themselves with questions of morality

IT WAS back to Westminster and, of course, back to basics yesterday.

The Opposition at the first Prime Minister's Question Time after the

Christmas recess were like ravening lions who, having been thrown some

raw meat, were avid for more.

What were the roars, or at any rate howls of rage when it appeared

that the Prime Minister had unfortunately been unable to make it back

from the Nato summit in Brussels in time to take his place at the

despatch box.

A wise Opposition might have accepted this philosophically as one

reason for his absence -- apart from any bribes that might have passed

to Brussels air traffic control -- was Mr Major's approval for possible

air strikes on the Serbs which could well be a violation of the basic

defence concept that you don't volunteer for any conflict unless you are

sure you are going to win.

Labour back benchers are mostly hawkish on the subject of bombing

Serbs have satisfied themselves that they are now fascists rather than

communists.

Mr Smith is a bit of a hawk too, so Mr Major may have unearthed one

bi-partisan policy which we will just have to hope is not paid by UN

ground troops.

It was thus Mr Tony Newton, the PM's stand-in, who was thrown to the

lions. He prudently adopted the minimalist version of back to basics --

improving education, fighting crime, strengthening the economy; not so

different, really, from what Governments claim all the time they are

doing.

Mr Newton, not being not being able to find a better hole, kept his

head down and reduced his script to, well, basics.

Some Tories who, one imagined, had survived their whips' searching

investigation of their personal morals, rose to ask Mr Newton if he did

not think the revival in the housing market, improvement in the economy

and burgeoning of business confidence were wonderful examples of just

how well the Government was doing.

The Opposition hooted derisively and Mr Newton, although he did,

naturally, think all these manifestations were wonderful, restrained his

rapture.

Mr John Smith, for whom back to basics has been turned by the spate of

recent Tory misadventures into an open goal aimed some further well

directed shots at this large target. Mr Newton's and the Prime

Minister's abbreviated version of what it was all about did not sound

much like the ministerial rhetoric of last autumn's party conference, he

observed.

Having warmed up he accused the Government of ''hyprocisy and double

standards'' and, sounding like the old fashioned, albeit right wing,

socialist he probably still is denounced the Government for ''having one

set of rules for the people and another set for ministers and Tory

MPs.''

Mr Newton, having picked the ball out of the net three times had a

brief respite while the polite Mr Eric Clarke (Midlothian -- Lab.)

wished him a happy new year and Mr Patrick Nicholls (Teignbridge -- Con.

launched a diversionary attack on the Liberal Democrats.

A politically incorrect Liberal Democrat councillor in Mr Ashdown's

own constituency had written remarks about various ethnic minority

groups which, said Mr Nicholls with only a little hyperbole, ''would not

be tolerated in the National Front.'' Mr Ashdown sat like a man who

knows he has to take it.

With one minute to go, Mr Newton was pounced on by Mr Dennis Skinner

(Bolsover -- Lab.) with a double-barrelled attack on what he called a

''housing fiddle'' when referring to Tory MP Alan Duncan (Rutland and

Melton) and the Government's #200,000 bail out of a Tory MP's failed

company (this an attack on Gyles Brandreth, Chester).

Mr Newton insisted Mr Brandreth and his company had been treated no

differently from any other individual or company in similar

circumstances and had nothing to say for Mr Duncan that he had not

already said for himself.

The Speaker rang the bell and the House moved on to a Bill on crime

and public order. What the Conservative Party needs is some private

order but there is not much sign that it has yet got back to that

particular basic.