2007-02-19 20:38:36 · 14 answers · asked by Bob M 1 in Politics & Government ➔ Politics
Gordon Brown will need to call a general election as soon as he takes up office as PM.
In fact Tony Bliar should go to the Queen and ask for parliment to be dissolved and for a general election to take place.
..And consider these questions.
Why should Gordon Brown be PM, has anyone elected him as such..?
What is his mandate for running the country.?
Why does he always run away when big issues raise their heads..??
2007-02-20 07:58:06 · answer #1 · answered by knowitall 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Gordon Brown won't get a proper chance because of the legacy handed down by Tony Blair
2007-02-20 01:31:06 · answer #2 · answered by cassidy 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Certainly NOT me. Brown is part of a UK Executive that exercises complete control over England when he himself is democratically unaccountable to the English people over vast swathes of Government policy, but when he becomes Prime Minister he will head up a UK Executive that effectively makes England a Scottish electoral dictatorship.
Gordon Brown has no mandate from the UK electorate on all matters that have been devolved to Scotland.
2007-02-19 22:16:22 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
I am Scottish and I am ashamed of Ebeenezer Brooon..& the rest of the Scottish MP's ( Tony is Scottish too ! ) that make up the Labour Party. Brooon is just another Socialist gone mad with Power.. If he becomes Prime Minister - God Help Us... I am praying that I can win the Lottery to get my family out of the former United Kingdom - which has now be renamed TAXLAND
2007-02-20 10:54:19 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
I look forward to him not being Chancellor. It's just a disaster that he'll be PM instead of on the back benches.
2007-02-19 22:29:52 · answer #5 · answered by Morgy 4 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Now it relatively is a complicated question! i'd say on stability they're the two as undesirable as one yet yet another in each and each and each and each branch. even in spite of the reality that he replace extraordinary right into a nasty ultimate minister, standard i'd say John significant's government wasn't quite as undesirable as Brown's in spite of the reality that via ability of reality he controlled the financial kit quite extraordinary and additionally via ability of reality he did no longer have self perception in taking peoples freedoms from them. each and each week we pay attention approximately Labour's creepy identity enjoying enjoying cards plan and national e mail database and each and each week they attempt and ban some thing else. the situation the strategies-blowing Tory government went incorrect is they neglected Britain's public centers. The NHS replace into on the threshold of provide way, they privatized the railways and colleges and up and down Britain have been certainly falling down. they have been constantly flying human beings via using helicopter to hospitals for emergency scientific care via ability of reality there have been no longer sufficient beds accessible! there have been by no ability any police on the beat the two. it relatively is surely why i think of of they misplaced so badly 1997.
2016-10-16 02:03:59 · answer #6 · answered by ? 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Yes. Besides, do we have a choice. Cons are patheric, Libs are not promising anything. What else?
We better make with the devil whom we think we know!
One thing for sure. He would be better than Blair, the poodle!
All the best!/
2007-02-19 20:45:21 · answer #7 · answered by Ebby 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Why are we having Lord & Lady Blairs choise of PM forced upon us?, do we have no say in who leads us?
I would rather have Menzies than Brown or even the tory drug addict.
2007-02-19 21:19:22 · answer #8 · answered by john k 5 · 0⤊ 1⤋
As a Scot - no.
If Broon is PM then it means that we haven't got independence.
2007-02-20 10:56:54 · answer #9 · answered by drakshug 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Perhaps he won't get chance - Blair seems to be trying to scuttle the country as fast as he can.
2007-02-20 07:19:48 · answer #10 · answered by lotsmorewine 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋