English Deutsch Français Italiano Español Português 繁體中文 Bahasa Indonesia Tiếng Việt ภาษาไทย
All categories

If yes, how could the delegates achieve this?

Whatever one's personal views, it is obvious that a large majority of Labour Party members greatly disapprove of Blair's record, particularly over Iraq and the Lebanon but also in relation to privatisation. How can the Party retain any future credibility with the electorate if it has supported a leader with whom it is in fundamental disagreement?

Serious answers please. Anbody can slag off Blair or indeed any other leading politician.

2006-08-30 04:57:03 · 13 answers · asked by Philosophical Fred 4 in Politics & Government Government

13 answers

yes, in England you elect your representatives, they in turn elect a prime minister. if for any reason the group doesnt like the current prime minister they can call to elect a new leader. The government in the Star wars episode 1 - 3 is based of the british parliament. they can call for a vote of no confidence.

2006-08-30 05:02:08 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

I don't think so. When Blair became elected as party leader the press and others said he would be evicted after a Labour election win to put a more strident left winger in charge. To counter this the labour party introduced a rule that a Labour PM cannot be ejected from that position by the party.

The conference could of course make his position untenable - but I suspect he would even brass that out.

2006-08-30 05:08:11 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

The conference is too stage managed to allow a vote of no confidence. There is, however, a growing dissatisfaction among Labour members and the public which could show itself in a massive demonstration outside the conference. The government and the police will do all they can to suppress it but Tony Blair will not be able to ignore it for much longer.

2006-08-30 05:11:00 · answer #3 · answered by migelito 5 · 0 0

A bad newspaper editorial could force Blair to resign, but his resignation would still be voluntary. Theoretically the Labour Party can remove him as leader, but in practice this is unlikely to happen because Blair still has many allies in the senior ranks of the Labour party, and it would be difficult to get for example a motion of confidence onto the conference agenda. In any case, even if they did remove him as leader, he would still technically have to resign as prime minister.

2006-08-30 06:04:19 · answer #4 · answered by Graham I 6 · 0 0

What concerns in a Labour management election is the form of Labour MPs, of which there are 350. for this reason, eighty Labour MPs are not sufficient in themselves to defeat Brown. i think of Brown might easily stand till he misplaced or it grew to alter into obvious he might badly lose a management election -even if if that meant that even if he gained, his management grew to become into irreparably broken. i'm thinking he will quicker take the Labour party (or maybe the rustic down) with him particularly than stand aside. there is likewise yet another situation - who is going to stand against him? Who desires to take on the management of the Labour party, 12 months earlier than an wide-spread Election they look destined to lose by using a landslide? taking on the management of the Labour party now may well be political suicide - if every person else did, and inevitably (it style of feels) misplaced the final Election their occupation may well be over. so a procedures as I understand a number of senior Labour MPs have already written off the subsequent wide-spread Election and are searching for to 2015. The spending cuts and tax rises after the election which would be necessitated by using the present state of public funds potential whoever wins the subsequent election has a poison chalice. this potential, in accordance to Labour party inner thinking, there's a intense threat of a metamorphosis of government in 2015 besides. In that state of affairs, a senior Labour MP has a decision - go now and be PM and not utilising a mandate for under 12 months or carry back, enable Brown lose, and in all probability be PM which incorporate your individual mandate in as low as 5 years time.

2016-11-06 01:55:25 · answer #5 · answered by sokin 4 · 0 0

Yes. Blair may have to resign after the conference, but it won't be the delegates that achieve this, as they will, for the most part, be the chosen Blair supporters.(rent-a-mob, in other words)

This will in fact be his own MP's and cabinet ministers that will cause him the problems.

However, they don't call him Teflon Tone for nothing!!

2006-08-30 05:18:42 · answer #6 · answered by steve b 2 · 0 0

I beleive the answer is no. I saw Tony Benn on This Week a few years ago, when he had a regular segment with Wm Hague called 'Bill and Benn', and he said the rules had been changed in recent years to make it much harder to oust a leader than it is in the Conservatives. Actually, I don't know if it's impossible but it's certainly not easy.

2006-08-30 06:08:46 · answer #7 · answered by Dunrobin 6 · 0 0

A large number of Labour party members greatly dissaprove of his record, that's true. Unfortunately for us and the country it appears it is not yet the majority of his party - if it was the majority yes, I believe they could call for his resignation, and demand it, if the majority felt and voted that way - That's democracy.

2006-08-30 05:11:03 · answer #8 · answered by Barry G 2 · 0 0

I don't know the answer to your question, but I do so hope it is 'yes'. Blair has sold this country down the river on so many issues and appears to have been able to line his own pockets at the same time by 'cultivating' human rights issues which his dearly beloved picks up! It is a matter of complete amazement to me that he is still sitting comfortably where he is1

2006-08-30 05:07:28 · answer #9 · answered by Purple 8 4 · 2 0

The labour party conference isn't until September.

2006-08-30 05:18:12 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

fedest.com, questions and answers