Prime minister’s questions: a shouty, jeery, very occasionally useful advert for British politics. Here’s what you need to know from the latest session in POLITICO’s weekly run-through.

What they sparred about: The economy, of course. A week after Rachel Reeves’ second tax-raising budget, Tory Leader Kemi Badenoch and Prime Minister Keir Starmer went toe to toe on the aftermath, which hasn’t been plain sailing for the government.

Lo and behold: Badenoch asked the PM if he believed “when an organization descends into total shambles, the person at the top should resign,” i.e., him. Starmer, obviously, wouldn’t go there, given his uncertain political future, insisting he was “very proud” to lead a Labour government that was “fixing the mess that they [the Tories] left.”

Got your number: Badenoch, you won’t be surprised to read, was unsatisfied, arguing Starmer “doesn’t want to answer a question about taking responsibility, because he likes to blame everyone else except himself.” She accused the chancellor of “twisting the facts” and asked if Reeves would comply with any Financial Conduct Authority investigation over the biggest post-budget row …

If economic forecasts send you to sleep: Opposition parties claim the chancellor told porkies about the fiscal situation to justify a planned manifesto-breaching income tax hike, which was later ditched. Reeves naturally denies any such charge. Still with us?

This blessed plot: The PM gave as good as he got, accusing the Tory leader of “completely losing the plot” and said the government was “turning the page” on the Tories’ financial record. However, the briefing wars may mean members of the public struggle to spot the difference between the red and blue parties.

Case in point: The Tory leader had plenty of fun reading out anonymous briefings from irate Cabinet ministers. “The handling of this budget has been a disaster from start to finish,” Badenoch quoted, looking across the despatch box to speculate who was the culprit. “Was it him? Was it her?” she joked, pointing at different ministers.

The hardest word: The session may be called Prime Minister’s Questions, but Starmer repeatedly said Badenoch should “get up now and apologize” for claiming Reeves had misled the public. The Tory leader, who’d have thought it, didn’t oblige and continued her forthright attacks: “She doesn’t belong in the Treasury, she belongs in la la land.” Brutal scenes.

Whip hand: Badenoch had one final go at landing a blow by highlighting the scrapped two-child benefit cap, despite previously removing the whip from seven Labour MPs who supported that measure just after the election. “How did it suddenly become affordable at the very time he needed to save his own skin?” Badenoch cried.

Mission impossible: Starmer ducked the point but had some fire in his belly, saying the Tories should be “utterly ashamed” as “the party of child poverty.” He insisted bringing down child poverty was “a moral mission, a political mission and a personal mission,” but stirring rhetoric came too late in their joust. “Isn’t the truth that behind it all is a prime minister who only cares about one person’s job, his own?” Badenoch concluded.

Helpful backbench intervention of the week: Blyth and Ashington MP Ian Lavery decried the Tories’ record on poverty in the north east of England, asking the PM if his constituents had much to look forward to from Labour. Starmer listed the government’s many policies to alleviate poverty, with a few jabs at the Conservatives for good measure.

Totally unscientific scores on the doors: Starmer 6/10. Badenoch 8/10. The Tory leader had reams of ammo to work with following briefing wars and Office for Budget Responsibility watchdog Richard Hughes’ resignation as chair over leaked fiscal documents. Badenoch continued the tirade that was at the front and center of her immediate response to the budget last week, and effectively laid out the political choices Starmer made. The PM gave decent stats and some emotional language, but wasn’t able to seize the narrative.