For the love of God, no!
This has got to be one of the most terrifying blog posts I have ever read:
No, if there is to be a third Prime Minister of 2007, it will be someone else entirely – probably a senior Cabinet minister who will be tasked with leading Labour and the coalition through the choppy waters that would follow Brown’s inevitable demise.
Step forward, Mr Jack Straw.
Jesus. For the good of the country, all speculation about a general election and pressure on Gordon Brown must stop NOW. Who would you rather have in Number 10, a chicken or a turkey?
UPDATE: It looks very much as if the decision has been made: it’s a no.
Posted on October 6th, 2007 at 9:11am under UK politics
| Related posts... • The team that couldn’t shoot straight • See Saw Marjory Straw • Man of Straw (sorry) |
• Permalink • Trackback • Subscribe |
|
|
|
• 9 Comments |
C’mon. The terrible way all this election hiatus has been allowed to run and run raises major questions about Brown’s competence as PM.
There’s no constitutional imperative to hold an election now but the latest poll shows that voters now want one soon – 48% of all voters want a November contest, against 43% who do not with 8% undecided.
http://politics.guardian.co.uk/polls/story/0,,2184783,00.html
Apparently, the greatest pressure for an early election is coming from Conservative voters, “67% of whom say they want one to take place against only 29% who do not. Support for a poll now is much weaker among Labour voters: only 36% want an election while 58% do not.”
If Brown is at all wise he’ll quickly end the farce and decide to hang on without another election for a while.
Well, I’m glad it got some sort of reaction.
You’re the Bram Stoker of political blogging, Paul.
48% of all voters want an election? I wonder how many would actually bother to turn out and vote?
This is a frenzy driven entirely by the political media class. We don’t need an election and I don’t believe that many people are bothered about having one (indeed the majority will stay at home anyway, whenever the election happens). I still like to think this was a brilliant piece of strategy by Brown to produce a bit of Tory ‘premature ejaculation’. I’m probably wrong but that would be my story if I were Brown
As a Tory voter who spends most of his life abroad. A year from now the UK economy will be an absolute shambles (it is already, you just haven’t got the message you are mostly too stupid watching reality shows and corrienders) Now, I don’t think the Tories would win – a year hence…..no problem.
It has to be admitted that the front page of Saturday’s FT was already rather grim:
“A slump in the commercial property market is hitting retail investors and pension schemes with sector funds suffering their first fall in total returns for 15 years in September.”
http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/bce7a596-7382-11dc-abf0-0000779fd2ac.html
On Friday, Martin Wolf had a special piece about an overdue correction in house prices:
“Gordon Brown is thinking about calling an early election. Among the reasons to believe he should do so is the vulnerability of the UK to a housing meltdown similar to that in the US. . . An election now might at least postpone his day of reckoning.”
http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/0ecb34d0-72a8-11dc-b7ff-0000779fd2ac.html
The day before, The Times had this:
“The first monthly fall in house prices this year was reported yesterday [3 October], fuelling fears that a looming downturn in the property market will hit the economy hard next year.”
http://property.timesonline.co.uk/tol/life_and_style/property/buying_and_selling/article2592162.ece
Brown, who feels that he is quite capable of totally ignoring 78% who want a referendum, is unlikely to be pushed around by a mere 48% wanting an election.
Better the devil you know in some ways.
Yes, there could be a property crash as bad as the one in 1990 and look what happened to the incumbent party then (the Tories). Oh, hang on, I remember now…they remained in power for another seven years! (Until just after the market had started to recover) Its a funny old world.
True – but the international economic context is entirely different now.
The British economy got an unexpected boost from dropping out of the European Exchange Rate Mechanism in September 1992. By the final quarter of 1995, Britain’s standardised unemployment rate was lower than that of France, Germany or Italy and Britain’s employment rate of working age people was higher.
Also, in 1992, Clinton was elected US President and the American economy started out on its long boom through the rest of the 1990s.
This time the concern is about how much the busting of the property price bubble in America and a credit-crunch induced by sub-prime mortages there will cause the American economy to slow down, possibly to the point of moving into recession.
The OECD is certainly concerned about UK economic prospects:
“The Bank of England may have to cut interest rates because of a risk that UK growth will weaken as a result of the recent turmoil in financial markets, the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) has warned.
“In its 2007 Economic Survey of the United Kingdom, the OECD said: ‘The outlook for both growth and inflation has now become more uncertain and there is a risk that growth will be weaker going forward, which could imply a need for interest rate reductions.’â€Â
http://business.timesonline.co.uk/tol/business/economics/article2543131.ece
Worth reading the latest OECD survey of the UK Economy:
http://www.oecd.org/document/56/0,3343,en_2649_201185_39354040_1_1_1_1,00.html
The OECD survey makes special mention of Britain’s productivity gap with peer-group countries and Britain’s relatively large budget deficit – after a decade of New Labour.