I don't get this whole passing of leadership thing. I moved here 8 years ago fromt he US and I have been reading about how supposedly gordan brown is going to take over (YUCK) when tony blair steps down. So if the government is supposed to be created by the people then why is it that a majority of the palament members pay their way in and are not voted in? and how can it be called a government if tony blair is handing the leadership over to someone he chooses or whatever, Isn't that turning communist?
2006-09-08 12:48:14 · 15 answers · asked by greenhorse8179 2 in Politics & Government ➔ Politics
People are supposed to vote for the MP they feel represents their needs best. The party they belong to is supposed not to come into it. However, just like in America, people mostly vote on party lines. In America, Presidents have abdicated or been assassinated. Then you get a President you did not vote for (let's face it, you do not vote for the VP, you vote for the person you want to be President!). It is the same for UK political parties. The party votes for the leader. The general population does not have a say in it. Just because Blair backs someone, it does not mean the Labour Party will vote that person into power. Then, in a General Election, the party with the most seats gets into power and the leader of that party becomes Prime Minister.
All the parties vote for their leader; nobody else can vote for them. (can you imagine a Democrat voting for who they think should be the Republican Presidential candidate?!!!)
However, Blair has given so much power to Europe, I am not sure it makes much difference what happens in the UK now - and the EU is run by an unelected quango. The Labour government allows Wales to have a parliament (okay, without much power), and Scotland to have a parliament. The Scots MPs vote on English matters but the English MPs cannot vote on Scottish issues. Thanks to the Blair government!
I hope that is not too convoluted (it felt like it while I was typing it!) and that it makes some sort of sense!!!
2006-09-08 13:07:58 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 1⤋
OK, I'll forgive you a little because you're American so your system is different. Over here we don't elect a President, we elect a Parliament (note the spelling) which is formed of 646 Members of Parliament (reduced from 659 at the last election). If a party has a majority they form a government. The Labour Party has a working majority of 64 at the moment. The leader of that party becomes the Prime Minister - that leader having been chosen by an internal party system. In the Labour Party the leader is elected by a one member one vote and electoral college - ordinary members have a vote, affiliated members (through political levy paying trade union membership, and of other organisations affiliated to the party), and the Parliamentary Labour Party (MPs and Peers). Bearing in mind the differences and that the PM is NOT elected how on earth are we turning into communists?
The Prime Minister does not have the powers of veto or a West Wing policy unit of his own to drive forward an agenda independent of Parliament like in the States - decisions are taken within Government; through Cabinet meetings, departmental meetings, consultations etc etc. Any Bill put before the House gets considered in both Houses of Parliament - Lords and Commons - and in Committee.
What on earth you are talking about in terms of "palament members pay their way in and are not voted in" I just don't know - what is palament? I can only guess that you are referring to the ongoing inquiry into "cash for peerages". If that's the case Peers are not elected but appointed and the are approved by an independent body which is how the whole thing about loans etc came into question. The Lords does not have the same range of powers as the Commons and the Speaker of the House of Commons can invoke the Parliament Act to overrule the Lords if they reject a Bill that it is the will of the Commons to bring in.
You are really mixing things up. I would recommend you go to the Parliament's website and have a look at some of the stuff there about how Parliament works - just go to www.parliament.uk and follow the links.
2006-09-08 20:35:22 · answer #2 · answered by janebfc 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
At the time, Tony Blair was the leader of the opposition. The Conservatives were in government and the general public obviously had enough of them and voted Labour in. Until they are voted out again by the voting public, whoever the party chose as their leader will be the Prime Minister.
When the country voted Labour, and therefore Blair in, the Conservatives had been in power for ages, originally the country voted them in because they were fed up with Labour, at the time Margaret Thatcher was party leader, so when the conservatives got in, she was Prime Minister, when she stepped down, we inherited John Major, who was voted in again as the country's majority chose to elect the Conservatives again. So Gorden Brown (big yuk) will probably be Prime Minister until the next election, when the country will vote in their favourite party, if its Labour, Brown will Stay, if its Conservative, then David Cameron, if he is still party leader will be Prime Minister.
2006-09-08 19:58:32 · answer #3 · answered by Tefi 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Britain does not elect its Prime Miniser. That title is simply bestowed on the leader of the party who has won the largest number of constituency seats.
In this country, each registered elector votes for an individual member of parliament dependent on their local area (known as a constituency), who is in most cases linked to one of the main political parties.
In the 1997, 2001 and 2005 General Elections, the Labour Party won the majority of these constituencies, and were thereby asked by the Queen to form a Government. Tony Blair is Prime Minister because he is the Leader of the Party, and has been elected by public members of the Labour Party.
Therefore, the public only selects the party to rule the country. the members of the party decide who should be their, and the party's leader.
2006-09-08 19:56:35 · answer #4 · answered by saddler21 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Tony Blair is a Prime Minister not a President.
In principle our Queen is the same standing as your President.
You chose to have an elected President in1776 but we stayed with a King/Queen.
2006-09-08 20:20:40 · answer #5 · answered by the knitter 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
in the UK you don't vote for the prime minister you vote for your area's (constuency) politician and whoever wins gaisna seat in parlimant representing your area.. they represent a party so one seat means the party has one seat, the party with the most seats wins the mejority in parlimant and become the goverment.. the leader of that party (who was voted leader by the party) becomes the prime minister. Therefore if the prime minister (as with any other pary leader) steps down then the party vote for the next leader, who will become the prime minister as he is the leader of that party who has the mejority therefore the goverment.
the reason the US vote for a president is because he is the head of state, the UK's head of state in the Queen and ofcourse ya dont vote for a king or queen they inherit the throne
2006-09-08 20:24:22 · answer #6 · answered by Sleepy 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
i agree 100% but unfortunately we voted labour and i know when i voted it was that g brown would be next and at the end of the day its 23:59:59 no one in government knows what they are doing
at least its not Bush!!
2006-09-08 19:54:52 · answer #7 · answered by paul c 1 · 0⤊ 0⤋
We didn't vote him in, the Labour Party chose him.
That's the way the system works, and it's as good a system as any.
2006-09-08 19:59:48 · answer #8 · answered by boracic1 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
we vote for a party not a person, we voted to have the labour party leading the country, whoever might be leading that party
2006-09-08 19:50:33 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
We didn't vote blair, we voted Labour.
2006-09-08 19:49:43 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋