US Edition 
Sketch: Step by step, David Cameron's exhausting plan for Ukraine
David Cameron insists Russia will face "costs and consequences" over its intervention in Ukraine - but it is not clear what they will be.
Listening to PMQs on Wednesday was exhausting. The Prime Minister characterised his response to the Ukraine crisis as a series of steps.
Or, for the sake of clarity, a series of steps he would take before considering a series of steps. There were so many steps that even those of us watching from the gallery began to flush a shade of crimson. There was tough talk on avoiding escalation, but most of us would have settled for an escalator.
It all started clearly enough. The PM leant firmly on the dispatch box, furrowing his eyebrows as he twice repeated: “We need to be clear”.
The second time, he even pledged to be “absolutely clear”. Russia’s actions were, David Cameron said, “completely unacceptable”. Clearly. But what exactly would he do about it? Not missing a beat, he had the answer: “Costs and consequences need to follow.” Ah. One can imagine Vladimir Putin quaking as he calls in his foreign minister for a crisis briefing. “What are they threatening, Sergey?”
“It’s serious this time, Vlad, really serious. Not only costs – but consequences, too!”
This two-pronged assault has already begun. Not only will Putin be denied the bonhomie of British ministers at the Paralympics in Sochi but, Mr Cameron confirmed, he has “suspended preparations for the G8 meeting”.
That’s right, he has suspended preparations. A thousand flip chart pens are in limbo. He did hint, though, that if Putin is really naughty, he might even consider suspending the actual meeting. Then came the real meat. Clutching his briefing folder firmly, the PM gravely outlined his action plan.
The Government was, in fact, considering “extra steps”. Why? “To discourage Russia from taking further steps”. And what will be discussed at today’s EU summit on the issue? Yes, that’s right. “Further steps”. Even the Bolshoi Ballet would struggle with this routine.
There was, however, one issue on which the PM could take a bold and decisive stance: in agreeing wholeheartedly with his backbenchers’ compliments.
SamCam made a rare appearance in the gallery, but MPs were determined to offer rather more vocal support. For, a day after he had taken to Twitter to trumpet the Government’s apprenticeship programme, the PM took a series of challenging questions from fellow Tories.
First into bat was Stephen Mosley (Con, City of Chester), beaming his delight at the fall in the number of young people claiming jobseekers’ allowance.
“Would the Prime Minister congratulate employers who are creating apprenticeships?” Staggeringly, the Prime Minister would.
Then Brooks Newmark (Con, Braintree) piped up with an even trickier poser. “Would the Prime Minister agree with me that the Chancellor’s long-term economic plan is working?”
A fortnight after the Speaker pledged to reform “Punch and Judy” PMQs and weed out tedious questions, few MPs appear to be taking pre-emptive action. Any more of this sort of thing and John Bercow might have to unleash the mightiest threat of all: costs and consequences.