Andrew Grice's Sketch: Jeremy Corbyn bounces back at PMQs after debacle over shoot-to-kill comments

After his mauling, the Labour leader had tried to defuse the issue by backing the use of 'proportionate and strictly necessary force' against terrorists

Jeremy Corbyn is a long-standing opponent to military intervention

Winston Churchill’s advice for party leaders about the Commons chamber was made for Jeremy Corbyn: “The opposition occupies the benches in front of you, but the enemy sits behind you.”

The session of Prime Minister’s Questions on 18 November must have felt like the morning after the night before for the Labour leader. The previous day, he had been roughed up in the chamber by several senior Labour MPs over his reluctance to endorse a “shoot-to-kill” policy against terrorists.

The Conservatives hoped for a repeat performance but Labour's boys and girls behaved better in class, and their teacher had a better day. After his mauling, the Labour leader had tried to defuse the issue by backing the use of “proportionate and strictly necessary force” against terrorists.

He got off to a good start at PMQs, wisely playing the unity card over the Paris attack. “Nothing can justify the targeting of innocent civilians by anyone,” Mr Corbyn said. Mr Cameron responded in kind, saying it had been “a pleasure” to be with Mr Corbyn at the England-France football match at Wembley. Whatever next? Dave and Jezza sitting together to cheer England on at rugby or cricket? Maybe not: too middle class for Mr Corbyn.

For once, Mr Corbyn nodded vigorously in agreement when Mr Cameron mentioned their Wembley visit. This was the easy bit, nodding the ball into an open goal.

The two leaders also agreed when Mr Corbyn said “the dreadful terrorism in Paris has nothing in common whatsoever with the two million British Muslims”. But the Prime Minister was tiring of consensus, knowing he had a “shoot-to-kill” weapon in his locker. Slowly but surely, he began to part company from his new footy friend. “It is not good enough to say that there is no connection between these terrorists and Islam; they are making a connection, and we need to prove that it is not right,” said the PM.

Mr Corbyn landed a blow as he probed the extra money the Government has promised the security services. As Mr Cameron urgently consulted George Osborne, the Labour leader asked: “Does he want me to go on longer so that the Chancellor can explain the answer to him?” Neat.

The Labour leader also put Mr Cameron on the defensive over cuts to police budgets. It is bad timing after Paris that the Chancellor's latest round of cuts will be announced on 25 November.

Indeed, the faces of Labour MPs genuinely lit up when Mr Cameron was asked about his campaign as “the new leader of the anti-austerity movement in Oxfordshire” , following his criticism of cuts in his Witney constituency.

Unfortunately, the brilliant question was posed by Labour backbencher Jonathan Reynolds. The only Labour MP who seemed not to laugh was Mr Corbyn, who must have been kicking himself for not asking it.

Similarly, it was left to Angus Robertson, the SNP’s Westminster leader, and Labour’s John Mann to raise the issue of United Nations backing for any military action in Syria. Surely, a good line for Mr Corbyn?

Mr Cameron saved his coup de grace until after Mr Corbyn had used up his six questions and so had no reply. “Has it not come to something when the Leader of Her Majesty’s Opposition is not sure what the police’s reaction should be when they are confronted by a Kalashnikov-waving terrorist?" the PM asked.

The sea of glum faces on the Labour front and backbenches said it all. Overall, it felt more like a session of Opposition Leader’s Questions. That is a bad sign for Mr Corbyn. So is the sense that his enemy within has gained new recruits in recent days.