NEWPORT WEST MP Paul Flynn is launching a bid to end what he describes as the demeaning spectacle of Prime Minister's Questions.

He has written to the Prime minister David Cameron asking him to convene a meeting of party leaders to discuss alternatives to the weekly debate and to come up with a less confrontational format.

In an article to be published in the House Magazine on Monday Mr Flynn argues that the weekly national embarrassment of PMQs should not be allowed to continue.

And he says the fresh injection of 180-plus MPs should invigorate and inspire a determination to end what he says is a weekly self-humiliation.

"PMQs of the 4th of March were described as the ‘worst ever’. The evidence is convincing." says Mr Flynn, who argues that the replies given to Ed Miliband's questions were 'carefully manicured sound-bites' which were actually not related to the question being asked.

"In all other parliamentary oral questions, relevance rules. I asked at Welsh Questions about the Severn Tidal lagoons earlier that day. If the Welsh Minister’s answer had told me the price of cabbage, he would have been declared out of order. Why not the PM?"

Mr Flynn also attacks the crude insults which are often directed at those asking the questions.

"Robust badinage is acceptable. Crude insults are not. Members, unable to answer back, have been described as ‘a muttering idiot,’ ‘a dinosaur,’ ‘a waste of space’ and the tediously repeated ‘weak’. This is not grown-up politics."

Part of Mr Flynn's motivation for his bid to kick-start reform is the negative effect PMQs has on public opinion. In the article he says the public's disdain is 'visceral and growing.'

"Defenders of the status quo rejoice in the worldwide popularity of the spectacle. It’s diverting, amusing show business – but ultimately demeaning. The public’s derision mounts. They fairly ask if these same bellowing buffoons can be trusted to take decisions

"PMQs is probably un-reformable in its present state because of the advantages of direct confrontation to prime ministers. If we are to regain public trust a new format is needed.

"It should retain the robust gladiatorial challenge to power while maintaining a respectful decorum. It could retain the Opposition's advantage of choosing the subject while allowing the Prime Minister to have the last word. Debating value would be enriched if questioners were allowed supplementaries.

"Parliament is better than PMQs. We should prove it."

A spokeswoman for Number 10 said the prime minister has received Mr Flynn's letter and will respond in due course.