Gordon Brown - an unelected leader?

[MrsApron]

Well ffs. I was reading the bbc website last night and was absolutely stunned at the complete lack of understanding of the majority of people making comments.
"Gordon shouldn't be prime minister because he is unelected" - well durr we elect local mps first passs the post system majority party not a president.
"Gordon shouldn't be prime minister because he has a socttish constituency." Well it is for the uk parliment he isn't an msp
Gordon shouldn't be pm because well basically he is scottish.
I am appalled by the lack of understanding and the anti-scot feelings appearing.
to reel in horror look here

I'm really looking forward to Blair going and old Gordon taking over.
Worried that the anti-Scots feeling will result in Cameron victory at next election.

Thats what you get on the bbc talk boards I think - tend to be very rightish on the scale of things. Its interesting to view them via number of pple who recommend the post - gives you an inkling of how the 'nation' is thinking.

Probably the very pple who are moaning he is an 'unelected' leader were the ones who were fine with Major taking over from Thatcher.......any election there - non? Just loads of backstabbing.

I do think it comes from the fact that English MPs don't get a say in what happens in Scotland, but that Scottish MPs are allowed to vote on issues which only affect England. I think people resent the perceived inequality.

Interesting Freckle - any examples?

well I personally feel it was pathetic and very bad show that there was noone standing against him from the left of the party - if indeed there is a left wing any more.

I think his reign will be brief and inglorious.

i don't like him as chancellor and don't want as PM. But didn't want TB either

Can someone please explain to me how he has managed to become PM?

I'm sorry, I am foreign, but I have having trouble understanding how this works.

expat, we don't have a presidential/prime-ministerial election as such, we have constituencies that vote for members of parliament and the leader of the party that has the largest number Of seats in parliament is invited to form a government by HM queen. if the leader of the party resigns as PM, the party elects another leader who automatically becomes PM.

Just because we have retained a first past the post system doesn't mean that the majority of the electorate actually thinks that it is reasonable or fair! The problem is that despite the various political parties discussing electoral reform, in the end the government will have just been elected by the current system and therefore are usually less willing to look at the alternatives!

I love it when tory voters tell me that GB isn't an elected PM so shouldn't get in, as the Conservative Party did this themselves! Inded its an estabished precedent.

I think its a shame that there was no leadership comp, but it would seem ridiculous to nominate someone just for the sake of it wouldn't it?

Especially after the farce that became of the Lib Dem leadership elections (and the subsequent results of said election- although i'm bitter as he was neither my first or second choice as leader )

As John Major did when Margaret Thatcher resined.

Exactly

So is your point that because the Conservatives did this (though Major did in fact have to participate in a leadership contest - he was a surprise winner) that it is such a fab idea that it should hold for all time.

What about all the other things that the Conservatives did? Does this mean that Gordon has to have an affair with Ruth Kelly, or Patricia Hewitt?

No, but the Toriess weren't the first ones to do it weither- saw list the other day, been done a good few times in fact

Actually i think its a bad system (PR anyone?- am a member of LibDems after all ) but its wrong to criticise Labour for using the existing system.

Now, campaign for a change to electoral systems if you wish

but don't complain because someone (usually just the party you're not) follows the existing rules.

I think old two Jags got the parliamentary Brief for Illicit Affiars Didn't he?

No, I think the point is a lot of people moaning about the way GB has been 'unelected' didn't have the same fears when it was the Tories - so possibly they are Tory voters. If not, and they really dislike GB or the way the way 'new labour' has turned out then that may be a separate issue.

We just don't have an election when PMs resign or are forced out.....

Eh? I was merely giving an example.

And a party leadership election is not open to the whole electorate...

I am confusterated now, I wasn't having at go at anyone at this thread. I meant moaning in a general sense - ie what the OP was on about on the BBC talkboards.

NG your post was fine, I thought it was LM (could be worng) and I thought LM was directed at me, for which I have to say i cant feel botthered about coz its just a procedural point in the election process

MrsApron it would be domestic policy things like the smoking ban for instance. There is already the ban in Scotland voted for by the MSPs, but then when the subject is debated for England all the MPs at Westminster are allowed to vote (including the ones representing the Scottish constituencies).

I am all for the smoking ban btw, just using it as an example.. Also other health/education/social care issues.

I'm not getting at anybody - reform should start when people are unhappy with the status quo. Bear in mind that when Major took over from Thatcher Labour were still unelectable. And at least Thatcher stood at the 87 election with the view that she would be leader for the full term - Blair has been on his way out for the best part of a year now, which has given Brown et al much more time to do deals with the remaining MPs. If Blair had announced his resignation and then actually resigned last year we could have had a very different PM.

I am astonished that GB's being Scottish is even brought into the argument. If you don't like the man for his policies, party, whatever, then that's fair enough but why bring his nationality into the debate? Replace the work 'Scottish' with 'black' or 'Muslim' in some of those posts, and yes, it is racist.

I'm not talking about anyone on here btw, I mean the BBC website

Shouldn't he call an election though really? Then he would feel he has a Mandate.

I think it incredibly sad that nobody has stood against him.

Where's the hunger and the drive these days? This is a sign of our times. Nobody can be arsed to have that job. Nobody actually wants this job!

It would be a ridiculous career move to call anelection now.

And anyway he has a 'mandate': he is the chosen leader of th MP's, that's his job and as they chose him all is procedurally fie.

I do wonder if those who call for an election (sort of what someone said) would have had it been someonethey personally liked who got the position.

I say give the bloke a go. Maybe he will hang himself, but we should at least judge on what he does, not on what we thinkhe might possibly (in our oft biased minds- and I'm no labour member) do