Crosswords0 min ago
Unelected Prime Ministers
62 Answers
Remember how, a few years ago, right-wingers whined on about how Gordon Brown was “an unelected Prime Minister”? If so, I thought I’d bring to your attention that, as of now, David Cameron has been just that for as long as Brown was!
Macmillan was one for 33 months, Douglas-Home for 12 months and Major for 17 months. Brown lasted only about half that total.
So, Cameron becomes the Tories’ FOURTH ‘unelected Prime Minister’ in the past half-century or so.
Given the Conservative 4/Labour 1 position, why was Brown the only PM to have this ‘accusation’ constantly thrown in his face? Is it just another case of right-wingers having pathetically short memories?
Macmillan was one for 33 months, Douglas-Home for 12 months and Major for 17 months. Brown lasted only about half that total.
So, Cameron becomes the Tories’ FOURTH ‘unelected Prime Minister’ in the past half-century or so.
Given the Conservative 4/Labour 1 position, why was Brown the only PM to have this ‘accusation’ constantly thrown in his face? Is it just another case of right-wingers having pathetically short memories?
Answers
http://david
07:57 Mon 25th Mar 2013
meh - it's rather down to your definition of elected
I personally wouldn't count Cameron because he fought an election and won a majority, just not an absolute one
But I can see how you could make the argument the other way.
What concerns me more is the way both sides of the coalition have felt free to bargain with manifesto commitments that they sought election on.
It's a bit like employing a builder to add an extension onto your house based on a set of designs and coming back to find he's implemented a different design because your wife got another builder involved and they decided on a compromise without asking either of you!
I personally wouldn't count Cameron because he fought an election and won a majority, just not an absolute one
But I can see how you could make the argument the other way.
What concerns me more is the way both sides of the coalition have felt free to bargain with manifesto commitments that they sought election on.
It's a bit like employing a builder to add an extension onto your house based on a set of designs and coming back to find he's implemented a different design because your wife got another builder involved and they decided on a compromise without asking either of you!
You would get a builder without asking your wife Jake ?
Brave man !
I can't really see the comparison with Brown at all. Brown never faced an electorate as leader. Cameron, and Clegg have.
Given that it is likely we will see hung parliaments in the future will you say that about every future leader (especially since it will likely be an 'unelected' labour leader according to your book?
Brave man !
I can't really see the comparison with Brown at all. Brown never faced an electorate as leader. Cameron, and Clegg have.
Given that it is likely we will see hung parliaments in the future will you say that about every future leader (especially since it will likely be an 'unelected' labour leader according to your book?
Fred, no one denies Cameron is a party 'leader', the point is - given that his party did not gain an overall majority - he was not, in effect, 'chosen' by the electorate as Prime Minister. (And, in case anyone imagines I need a lesson on just what elections mean in the UK…I don’t!)
Em, as I'm sure you must have suspected, the only reason your answer is given as 'Best Answer' was because I carelessly clicked on the Mark as Best Answer thing instead of the link directly below it. As regards the link, I had said “in the past half century or so”, and thus I did not feel that going back for longer than a wholecentury was particularly relevant!
Jake, your complaint about the coalition is perfectly valid, of course. It’s just a rolling omnishambles which might well have another two years to run!
Em, as I'm sure you must have suspected, the only reason your answer is given as 'Best Answer' was because I carelessly clicked on the Mark as Best Answer thing instead of the link directly below it. As regards the link, I had said “in the past half century or so”, and thus I did not feel that going back for longer than a wholecentury was particularly relevant!
Jake, your complaint about the coalition is perfectly valid, of course. It’s just a rolling omnishambles which might well have another two years to run!
Ymb, Brown DID face the electorate as leader in 2010...and lost. Let's hope precisely the same will happen to Cameron in 2015!
Both men were party leaders, chosen by each party's different electoral system. When the whole country was asked what they thought of that, both men failed to get the necessary absolute majority. Simple.
Both men were party leaders, chosen by each party's different electoral system. When the whole country was asked what they thought of that, both men failed to get the necessary absolute majority. Simple.
My point, Fred, is right there in my original post. I presume you can remember how the rightwing gutter press - and many of its acolytes here on AnswerBank - DID whine on endlessly about Brown's so-called 'unelectedness'.
I simply thought it worthwhile pointing out - as I did - that Cameron now fits the same 'unelected' definition and for the same length of time.
The only reason he's in No 10 at all was made clear in a Times cartoon back in May 2010. Perhaps you'll remember it...it showed the front of the LibDem headquarters with a glowing lamp - clearly meant to be red - above the door. The caption read, "Knock three times and ask for Nickie." I don't surely need to explain to a barrister just what that makes the coalition arrangement.
I simply thought it worthwhile pointing out - as I did - that Cameron now fits the same 'unelected' definition and for the same length of time.
The only reason he's in No 10 at all was made clear in a Times cartoon back in May 2010. Perhaps you'll remember it...it showed the front of the LibDem headquarters with a glowing lamp - clearly meant to be red - above the door. The caption read, "Knock three times and ask for Nickie." I don't surely need to explain to a barrister just what that makes the coalition arrangement.
The thing that rankled (if indeed it did) was that there was a behind the scenes deal between Blair and Brown for Blair to jump ship mid-term and hand the reins over to Brown in order for Brown to 'have a go' at being PM without having to face the bothersome business of getting a mandate from the electorate to be so.
That Cameron was unsuccessful in securing an 'outright' victory in the election is hardly comparable.
That Cameron was unsuccessful in securing an 'outright' victory in the election is hardly comparable.
We do not elect the party leaders, the parties do that. On my ballot paper it had a candidate representing a party and I vote for that. The party with the most votes is elected and the party leader becomes prime minister.
If the party leader changes, then the Government was still elected regardless. The policies they were elected on stay the same.
People saying it is all undemocratic and that they have been cheated do not know how our system works. I repeat, the parties elect the Prime Minister, not the peple.
If the party leader changes, then the Government was still elected regardless. The policies they were elected on stay the same.
People saying it is all undemocratic and that they have been cheated do not know how our system works. I repeat, the parties elect the Prime Minister, not the peple.
Related Questions
Sorry, we can't find any related questions. Try using the search bar at the top of the page to search for some keywords, or choose a topic and submit your own question.