Should Brown succeed Blair?

Question

I don't care if you like or dislike Blair but should this practice be allowed given that the country voted for Blair to be PM.

Is it fair to install a new prime minister (someone the public has no say in!) half way through a parliment? whoever that might be?

And is Brown the right man for the job?

Just wanted to add that I know we are supposed to vote for a party and not a person but the reality is people vote for the leader and it will always be that way.

Answer 1

Whilst I understand people's points when they say we voted for the party not the person, I have to say I am still a Blair supporter and think he has quite possibly been the best PM we have ever had (yes, I do rate him over Churchill sry2sy).

Therefore, I think TB has been given a very raw deal by his own people and Brown has been one of the main instigators of this. His conduct has been appauling and self-serving and if he can be this bad as a deputy just think what a tosser he'd be as PM. This is all about Brown's own little ego-trip and I would trust him as far as I could throw him. Blair on the other hand, I feel has been nothing but a scapegoat.

It works both ways: if we voted for the party not the man, then why is the man getting blamed for the actions of his party (the Prescott affar, croquet, other things within the party) and forced to quit?

Answer 2

Unfortunately Brown will succeed Blair as PM (barring miracles). The reason is that we don't actually elect a Prime Minister but a local candidate. The leader of the largest parliamentary party becomes PM. A bit like when John Major when Thatcher quit. But I agree it is not very fair but that's the system we have.

Is Brown the right man for the job? Eh, how long have you got? No. He's more of a control freak than Blair, has less personality or charisma, is a proper socialist (rather than a champagne one) and bites his nails! All good reasons not to expect too much...But watch the changes over the next few months: new ties/suits, more smiling, clean hair, speaking in a more human way, playing the 'family man' bit etc etc.

Answer 3

Whether or not it's fair that a new leader in mid-term should be installed as PM or not I don't know. My own feeling is that a general election should be called but of course as in the case of John Major in 1991 when Maggie got ousted as leader, he became PM the next day - installed by the Queen of course. So it's not exactly setting a precident but I do know where you're coming from. And don't forget it's because you vote for the party, not for the leader/PM.

And is Brown the right man for the job? In a word, NO! I hate that man and I think he's a sleazeball - have done for ages and even more so after recent events but do I think the job's already in his back pocket, yeah, pretty much I'd say.

My 2p worth for what it's worth.

Answer 4

You are wrong to think that people voted for Blair, they voted for the Labour party to form a government. That is how politics works in parliamentary democracies: the people votes for parties to be in Parliament, and Parliament chooses the government. Presidential political systems like say, the USA, work diferent: people there vote for the person who is going to be President. But that is not the political system of the UK.

Because the UK is a parliamentary democracy with the parliament representing national sovereingty, then yes, it is up to the Blair to resign whenever he wants and it is up to the parliament to choose a new prime minister.

Elections in UK are not for the prime minister, they are for the parliament.

(Somebody above compares the current situation with the succession of Thatcher by John Major and says that Major was "installed" there by the Queen. Wrong: the Queen has not such power in this country, it was the Parliament who made Major PM.)

And yes, I do think that Brown is going to be a better PM than Blair. It takes brains to be chancellor of the exchequer.

Answer 5

No,Brown should not succeed Blair. No, Brown,in my own opinion,is not the right man for the job.Of course,it must be remembered,we vote for the party,not the leader. There will be a Leadership election.Will it make any difference to Brown? Remains to be seen.

Answer 6

As to your first question, I do not think that Brown, would do a better job, indeed I think he will do much worse!

As to the fairness of it , nobody voted for Blair to be PM, did they ? that is not how it works !
You vote for your candidates, if the majority of MP's voted for are Labour, then the "Labour Party" wins the election, and their leader becomes PM.

We need a PM, that is not so close to the US, and Brown, is not that man.

Answer 7

Yes,remember when Major took over from Thatcher she had to be dragged kicking and screaming from office.At least Blair was honest enough to declare his intention at an early stage.The next PM will have to be voted to office in the usual way.

Answer 8

We nonetheless have 'cupboard authorities', which signifies that any judgements taken, are authorities judgements, and under no circumstances, hence, the duty of anybody baby-kisser. it isn't interior the remit of a sitting best Minister to appoint a successor. once you assert that Gordon Brown has supported Tony Blair, you're personalising authorities organization as regardless of the reality that something of the cupboard/ Politicians at the on the spot are not in touch. TECHNICALLY, they are authorities judgements. Gordon Brown for sure, would not easily signal cheques, and he might want to were unable to maintain away from any expenditure touching on to the Iraqi warfare from going ahead, because, it were licensed by employing the authorities. If he had such skill, and employing your criteria, he might want to nicely be recognized as responsible for each thing the authorities does, which contains expenditure. i'm actually not protecting Gordon Brown (please search for on my answer to this question conceited PREVARICATOR?) because there are quite some staggering causes for criticising his Chancellorship in those elements the position he does have duty, administration, and/or effect, without accusing him of warfare crimes. i fairly do not imagine that it really is a sturdy theory to undermine the British authorities in the way you recommend, offended as you of direction are, because, fairly in warfare situations, this is taken under consideration necessary for voters now to not demonstrate open dissent and danger undermining the efforts of the defense force. wide-spread open dissent, is unpatriotic, and may lead on to anarchy.

Answer 9

Answers to you question 1 = No. 2 = No. 3 = No Brown is a Tax Mad Bastard , who has got away with Ripping the Nation to Pieces with his Tricks up to now , but soon all will be revealed

Answer 10

If you are looking for a man the public really has a say in, let Prince Harry succeed Blair