I never thought it would come to this....

in reality, all of this has been a total load of old bollocks
Positive Passion
Posts: 1027
Joined: 05 Jul 2017, 23:05

I never thought it would come to this....

Postby Positive Passion » 16 Jul 2019, 18:41

But ifJohnson is elected leader of the Tory party, the Queen should insist he seeks a mandate under a general election. Unfortunately Labour leadership is weak, so he might get one, but the principle demands attention.

User avatar
Lord Rother
Posts: 6998
Joined: 11 Feb 2009, 11:54
Location: breaking the legs of the bastard that got me framed

Re: I never thought it would come to this....

Postby Lord Rother » 16 Jul 2019, 19:46

Why?

Positive Passion
Posts: 1027
Joined: 05 Jul 2017, 23:05

Re: I never thought it would come to this....

Postby Positive Passion » 16 Jul 2019, 20:07

Lord Rother wrote:Why?


Because, at face value, in the modern world, British politics at a national level is to a material extent about the cult of personality. Although we talk about "the Tories won the 2015 election", really it was Cameron v Milliband - no-one wanted May as prime minister then. More significantly on a technical level, a change of leader always (based on historical precedent) entails a substantial change of policy in at least one significant area (usually several changes) and there is no electoral mandate for that new policy.

User avatar
The Prof
Trading coffee in Abyssinia
Posts: 45650
Joined: 16 Jul 2003, 18:32
Location: A Metropolis of Discontent

Re: I never thought it would come to this....

Postby The Prof » 16 Jul 2019, 20:59

As it has worked to the advantage of both parties (even though they both complain when the other side has an 'unelected' PM) I can't see a big change in the offing.
Half the PMs in the last 100 years have been 'unelected'.

User avatar
John aka Josh
Posts: 7909
Joined: 16 Jul 2003, 21:26
Location: By the banks of the mighty Bourne

Re: I never thought it would come to this....

Postby John aka Josh » 16 Jul 2019, 22:50

Should Johnson become PM there is not doubt he will rapidly call a general election. His views on unelected PMs are very clear. Here's an article he wrote for the New Statesman;





It's the arrogance. It's the contempt. That's what gets me. It's Gordon Brown's apparent belief that he can just trample on the democratic will of the British people. It's at moments like this that I think the political world has gone mad, and I am alone in detecting the gigantic fraud.

Everybody seems to have forgotten that the last general election was only two years ago, in 2005. A man called Tony Blair presented himself for re-election, and his face was to be seen - even if less prominently than in the past - on manifestos, leaflets, television screens and billboards. We rather gathered from the Labour prospectus that said Blair was going to be Prime Minister. Indeed, Tony sought a new mandate from the British electorate with the explicit promise that he would serve a full term.

The British public sucked its teeth, squinted at him closely, sighed and, with extreme reluctance, decided to elect him Prime Minister for another five years. Let me repeat that. They voted for Anthony Charles Lynton Blair to serve as their leader. They were at no stage invited to vote on whether Gordon Brown should be PM.
I must have knocked on hundreds of doors during that campaign, and heard all sorts of opinions of Mr Blair, not all of them favourable. But I do not recall a single member of the public saying that he or she was yearning for Gordon Brown to take over. Perhaps I missed it, but I don't remember any Labour spokesman revealing that they planned to do a big switcheroo after only two years.

It is a sad but undeniable truth that there are huge numbers of voters (including many Tory types) who have rather liked the cut of Tony's jib. They have tended to admire his easy manner, and his air of sincerity, and his glistering-toothed rhetoric. They may have had a sneaking feeling - in spite of Iraq - that he has not wholly disgraced Britain on the international stage; and though you or I may think they were wrong, they unquestionably existed.

In 2005, there was a large number who voted Labour on the strength of a dwindling but still significant respect for the Prime Minister. They voted for Tony, and yet they now get Gordon, and a transition about as democratically proper as the transition from Claudius to Nero. It is a scandal.

Why are we all conniving in this stitch-up? This is nothing less than a palace coup, effected by the Brownites, and it is possible only because Tony had run out of road. He knew that the Brownites would eventually assassinate him, and so he decided to go "at a time of his own choosing" and, with North Korean servility, the Labour Party has handed power over to the brooding Scottish power-maniac.

The extraordinary thing is that it looks as though he will now be in 10 Downing Street for three years, and without a mandate from the British people. No one elected Gordon Brown as Prime Minister, which is bad enough; but what makes things worse is that he now proposes to share power with a group of people even less elected than himself - the Liberal Democrats.

Yes, that's right: in revelations that yesterday rocked Westminster, it emerged that Sir Menzies Campbell has been engaged in talks with Gordon, about a "government of all the talents", which must be faintly mystifying to all those Labour candidates, activists and voters who have been engaged in fighting the Liberal Democrats. They thought they were campaigning for Tony Blair - and it now turns out there was a secret plan to bring in Gordon Brown and assorted Liberal Democrats, including good old Paddy Pantsdown.

Correct me if I am wrong, but I don't remember the electorate being asked their views of a Gord-Ming Lib-Lab coalition. It is fraud and double-fraud.

Why is Gordon Brown doing it? Because he is worried, of course, about his own democratic credentials to lead the United Kingdom. Last week, the exuberant Scottish executive, led by the Nationalists, decided that they would scrap any kind of co-financing for Scottish universities. Scottish students would go Scot-free, and so would Finns, Latvians, Germans, French, Portuguese, Luxembourgers and everyone except, of course, the English, who will continue to pay.

One of the consequences of this decision to return to taxpayer-funded universality (except for the English) is that the financial and competitive position of Scottish universities will continue to deteriorate. English universities, on the other hand, have received a cash injection of £1.35 billion in fees, and are thereby able to lure away Scottish lecturers; and many English university vice-chancellors hope to get more cash if it ever proves possible to lift the cap on fees.

In those circumstances - with a potential conflict of interest between English and Scottish universities - it is unthinkable that Gordon Brown and the other 58 Scottish MPs should be able to sit and vote on higher education finance in England, when English MPs have no say over the matter in Scotland.

How can Gordon Brown decide on the rights and wrongs of English top-up fees when they could put Scottish universities at a further financial disadvantage? Of course, he might decide he wants English students to pay more for tuition in England, whatever the consequences for Scotland. But how can he really assess the impact of fees that will never be paid by his own constituents?

He must know in his heart that the position is increasingly morally repugnant, and I would guess that is one reason why he would like to bring in Ming Campbell, his neighbour in Fife. He can see trouble brewing, and would like to forge an alliance with another Scottish party leader against the logical and obvious Tory solution - English votes for English laws.

We cannot allow this Belgian-style coalition to be foisted on us. We know that there is not a cat's chance in hell of a referendum on the new EU treaty, in spite of the further transfers of sovereignty involved. Gordon Brown could appease public indignation over that, and secure the democratic mandate he needs, by asking the public to vote at once on him, on the new EU treaty, and on the implications of the devolutionary settlement. Let's have an election without delay.

By Boris Johnson12:01AM BST 21 Jun 2007



Surely he wouldn't be so hypocritical as to change his stance...
Image

User avatar
St Jeemo the Humourless
Posts: 21129
Joined: 21 Jul 2003, 23:17
Location: ????

Re: I never thought it would come to this....

Postby St Jeemo the Humourless » 16 Jul 2019, 23:23

talk of him putting parliament on holiday in October to force no deal through.
Image So Long Kid, Take A Bow.

Positive Passion
Posts: 1027
Joined: 05 Jul 2017, 23:05

Re: I never thought it would come to this....

Postby Positive Passion » 17 Jul 2019, 05:20

The Prof wrote:As it has worked to the advantage of both parties (even though they both complain when the other side has an 'unelected' PM) I can't see a big change in the offing.
Half the PMs in the last 100 years have been 'unelected'.



Well indeed, though I would suggest that things have changed since Callaghan, and that subsequent changes in leader resulting in a new pm have been more controversial. The much-vaunted flexibility of the UK's unwritten constitution needs to show it's strength.

But I am not really being serious about the Queen interfering. Just the frustration coming out.

Positive Passion
Posts: 1027
Joined: 05 Jul 2017, 23:05

Re: I never thought it would come to this....

Postby Positive Passion » 17 Jul 2019, 05:20

John aka Josh wrote:Should Johnson become PM there is not doubt he will rapidly call a general election. His views on unelected PMs are very clear. Here's an article he wrote for the New Statesman;





It's the arrogance. It's the contempt. That's what gets me. It's Gordon Brown's apparent belief that he can just trample on the democratic will of the British people. It's at moments like this that I think the political world has gone mad, and I am alone in detecting the gigantic fraud.

Everybody seems to have forgotten that the last general election was only two years ago, in 2005. A man called Tony Blair presented himself for re-election, and his face was to be seen - even if less prominently than in the past - on manifestos, leaflets, television screens and billboards. We rather gathered from the Labour prospectus that said Blair was going to be Prime Minister. Indeed, Tony sought a new mandate from the British electorate with the explicit promise that he would serve a full term.

The British public sucked its teeth, squinted at him closely, sighed and, with extreme reluctance, decided to elect him Prime Minister for another five years. Let me repeat that. They voted for Anthony Charles Lynton Blair to serve as their leader. They were at no stage invited to vote on whether Gordon Brown should be PM.
I must have knocked on hundreds of doors during that campaign, and heard all sorts of opinions of Mr Blair, not all of them favourable. But I do not recall a single member of the public saying that he or she was yearning for Gordon Brown to take over. Perhaps I missed it, but I don't remember any Labour spokesman revealing that they planned to do a big switcheroo after only two years.

It is a sad but undeniable truth that there are huge numbers of voters (including many Tory types) who have rather liked the cut of Tony's jib. They have tended to admire his easy manner, and his air of sincerity, and his glistering-toothed rhetoric. They may have had a sneaking feeling - in spite of Iraq - that he has not wholly disgraced Britain on the international stage; and though you or I may think they were wrong, they unquestionably existed.

In 2005, there was a large number who voted Labour on the strength of a dwindling but still significant respect for the Prime Minister. They voted for Tony, and yet they now get Gordon, and a transition about as democratically proper as the transition from Claudius to Nero. It is a scandal.

Why are we all conniving in this stitch-up? This is nothing less than a palace coup, effected by the Brownites, and it is possible only because Tony had run out of road. He knew that the Brownites would eventually assassinate him, and so he decided to go "at a time of his own choosing" and, with North Korean servility, the Labour Party has handed power over to the brooding Scottish power-maniac.

The extraordinary thing is that it looks as though he will now be in 10 Downing Street for three years, and without a mandate from the British people. No one elected Gordon Brown as Prime Minister, which is bad enough; but what makes things worse is that he now proposes to share power with a group of people even less elected than himself - the Liberal Democrats.

Yes, that's right: in revelations that yesterday rocked Westminster, it emerged that Sir Menzies Campbell has been engaged in talks with Gordon, about a "government of all the talents", which must be faintly mystifying to all those Labour candidates, activists and voters who have been engaged in fighting the Liberal Democrats. They thought they were campaigning for Tony Blair - and it now turns out there was a secret plan to bring in Gordon Brown and assorted Liberal Democrats, including good old Paddy Pantsdown.

Correct me if I am wrong, but I don't remember the electorate being asked their views of a Gord-Ming Lib-Lab coalition. It is fraud and double-fraud.

Why is Gordon Brown doing it? Because he is worried, of course, about his own democratic credentials to lead the United Kingdom. Last week, the exuberant Scottish executive, led by the Nationalists, decided that they would scrap any kind of co-financing for Scottish universities. Scottish students would go Scot-free, and so would Finns, Latvians, Germans, French, Portuguese, Luxembourgers and everyone except, of course, the English, who will continue to pay.

One of the consequences of this decision to return to taxpayer-funded universality (except for the English) is that the financial and competitive position of Scottish universities will continue to deteriorate. English universities, on the other hand, have received a cash injection of £1.35 billion in fees, and are thereby able to lure away Scottish lecturers; and many English university vice-chancellors hope to get more cash if it ever proves possible to lift the cap on fees.

In those circumstances - with a potential conflict of interest between English and Scottish universities - it is unthinkable that Gordon Brown and the other 58 Scottish MPs should be able to sit and vote on higher education finance in England, when English MPs have no say over the matter in Scotland.

How can Gordon Brown decide on the rights and wrongs of English top-up fees when they could put Scottish universities at a further financial disadvantage? Of course, he might decide he wants English students to pay more for tuition in England, whatever the consequences for Scotland. But how can he really assess the impact of fees that will never be paid by his own constituents?

He must know in his heart that the position is increasingly morally repugnant, and I would guess that is one reason why he would like to bring in Ming Campbell, his neighbour in Fife. He can see trouble brewing, and would like to forge an alliance with another Scottish party leader against the logical and obvious Tory solution - English votes for English laws.

We cannot allow this Belgian-style coalition to be foisted on us. We know that there is not a cat's chance in hell of a referendum on the new EU treaty, in spite of the further transfers of sovereignty involved. Gordon Brown could appease public indignation over that, and secure the democratic mandate he needs, by asking the public to vote at once on him, on the new EU treaty, and on the implications of the devolutionary settlement. Let's have an election without delay.

By Boris Johnson12:01AM BST 21 Jun 2007



Surely he wouldn't be so hypocritical as to change his stance...


:lol:

User avatar
Lord Rother
Posts: 6998
Joined: 11 Feb 2009, 11:54
Location: breaking the legs of the bastard that got me framed

Re: I never thought it would come to this....

Postby Lord Rother » 17 Jul 2019, 06:09

Lovely stuff.