To think Liz Truss MUST call a general election to make “unpopular” and “difficult” decisions that deviate from the last GE manifesto?

[CurseOfBigness]

I get that Liz Truss is a keen new prime minister full of beans and ideas. I just don’t think she has the mandate to push through decisions that are “unpopular” and “difficult” if it deviates from the last general election’s manifesto.

Liz Truss plans radical shift in economic policy: New UK prime minister readies tax-cutting mini-Budget and says she is prepared to be unpopular.

This new prime minister has not gained her position by winning a general election. If she wants to radically change things and be “unpopular” then she needs to put the vote to the people.

Truss talked the talk about promoting “freedom” and not being dictated by “instructions”. But Freedom is not for free. The rule of law applies as “instructions” to help keep society civilised. Checks and balances.

Removing the cap on bankers’ bonuses is a poor PR move. Trickle down economics is problematic and already being criticised as ineffective.

Truss thinks she can do what she wants because she’s party leader and by default became prime minister. But Truss can’t afford to be “unpopular” because she needs to win a general election in her own right first.

AIBU to think Liz Truss must call a general election to make “unpopular” and “difficult” decisions that deviate from the last GE manifesto? Isn’t that how democracy works?!

Are you saying that Liz Truss has been voted for by the people?

I thought it was party members who voted for her. Only 81,326 votes to become PM.

Can a general election for forced upon her anyway?

Only if a sizeable proportion of her own MPs rebel and support a vote of no confidence in the government. Given that they got rid of nearly all the half-sensible Tories before the last election, I see no chance of that happening.

The Tory party is entirely in the hands of the wild-eyed loons of the far-right now.

Truss has no obligation under our constitution to call a GE either by law or precedent. No GE was called whennCallaghan took over from Wilson or BBrown from Blair. The Tories have been disappointing so far but the Opposition don’t even know what a woman is so I’m not pinning my hopes on them!

The opposition is weak. Agreed.

The Tories are likely to be re-elected. Possibly. But I think a hung parliament is more likely.

The majority that Truss enjoys has not been won by honest means.

Sure, Truss may not care about honesty and integrity, but she should in her role as PM. Setting a good example etc.

If Truss is prepared to be unpopular and make difficult decisions, then that’s fine as long as she has won the majority she enjoys. As it stands, she did not win that majority as PM through a general election in her own right. It’s borrowed… from Boris.

It is fragile if it deviates too much from what people voted for in the last general election.

There’s no requirement for the party in power to enact anything in its election manifesto

What a joke.

The political system needs overhaul and modernising.

An election can only be forced through a vote of no confidence in her government in the House of Commons. As long as she has the support of (most) Tory MPs, there is no chance she would lose such a vote.

We have a Parliamentary system, not a Presidential system. For the majority of our Parliamentary history, the Parliamentary party (the MPs of the ruling party) chose the leader (a more democratic process than the current system, as the MPs are accountable to their constituents.) It's only recently that party membership has been included in choosing the party leader.

Manifestos have no legal basis or enforceability. The entire system is largely built around honour, convention, decency and the populace giving a shit about such things. Which is why it's all gone so pear shaped with a uniquely venal group of politicians and a populace that is disengaged and uninformed.

It’s worth remembering this op - ie who you vote for in a GE

As it stands, she did not win that majority as PM through a general election in her own right. It’s borrowed… from Boris.

The only majorities she needs are in her own constituency and the majority of those who choose her party's leader. It's not borrowed from anyone. It's the way the system works. The conservatives have a majority, they chose her as their leader.

I agree 100% OP. She doesn't have a proper mandate until she's won a general election.

I understand that's not how election law works, but that doesn't change the moral position, for me.

And no hope of enacting your own party’s manifesto if in a coalition government for instance - then it’s all about compromise.

I think it was obvious the party would shift to the right with Johnson going. A few posters pointed this out beforehand. I’m not surprised although it became clearer how with the machinations of the party vote and endorsements etc.

There is no requirement to call a GE and she’d be mad to right now as we head into winter

She would be crazy to call any elections at this time. As much as her policies are mad and dangerous ( just my opinion) I fear we are stuck with them and her.

Nothing would surprise me.

Johnson must love Truss cocking things up and is probably looking forward to staging the biggest comeback since Lazarus.

Tbh. It’s worth everyone knowing. Maybe this period will be educational for all.

During the last election I know people voted for Boris, who otherwise wouldn’t vote conservatives. They liked Boris and found him personable. These same people do not like Truss, especially after she announced removing the cap on bankers’ bonuses (sore wounds from 2008, which wasn’t that long ago).

With the way it currently works, a strategy could be applied whereby a likeable front person can be used to win an election. Then a dislikable person can replace them to push through unpopular decisions that benefit donors etc.

Maybe that’s what the opposition should do? Get a likeable front person in, then switch.

It’s a recipe for corruption. But they’re allowing it…

Like what? Become like Italy?

They still have a sizeable majority so she doesn’t have to call an election and would probably be foolish to do so. And it’s not the norm to call an election when a new leader is appointed and becomes PM. That happens more often that a PM being head if a newly-minted government. Bu the same token, there is no requirement for her to wait til 2024.

Gordon Brown didn’t !.

Why have you chosen Italy?

We're not a presidency. She has no need to call a GE.

Doubt it. I had always thought manifestos were legally binding but apparently they're not so, unfortunately, the party can do what they like .

Looks like I’m coming at this from a moral position. Don't ethics matter in political law?

I think Truss is unwise to make bold, unpopular and risky moves without a proper mandate. There’s potential it could all backfire in ways she can’t possibly imagine.

She has a majority that was won through Boris at the helm. If her radical decisions do damage, then who is responsible?

Nobody can force anything here
The conservatives could have a vote of no confidence , but I doubt there is an appetite for any of this at the moment not unless Mr Sunak fancies another revolution and stirs things up again. Plus I doubt they would win this vote anyway. Too many people are happy she is the new leader.

Too many people are happy she is the new leader.

Too many people in her own party or general public?

It's happened loads of times. People said this in the early 60s, when Macmillan resigned and Douglas Home took over, and iirc Macmillan was in no rush when he took over when Eden resigned. There was no rush to have an election when Major and Brown took over, and May waited the best part of a year.

There has, however, long been a convention that if a PM who has been appointed between elections wants to make significant changes that weren't in the manifesto at the most recent election, they either seek cross-party agreement or call one.