It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Gordon Brown 'will fight only one election'

page: 1
3

log in

join
share:

posted on Jun, 21 2008 @ 08:12 AM
link   

Gordon Brown has told close allies that the next general election will be his last as Labour leader. The Prime Minister has pledged that he will step down at "some point" during the next parliament should he beat the Conservatives in two years.

Mr Brown has let a few senior Cabinet colleagues know that he intends to quit in time to allow his successor at least a year to fight the election after next, a move designed to stop speculation about his leadership.

If he pulls off a remarkable comeback and wins in 2010 he will quit well before the country goes to the polls. However, by setting out a timetable for his future departure Mr Brown may find that some question whether he should leave sooner.


The Daily Telegraph

This is a remarkable admission from the man who forced the same promise out of Tony Blair before the 2005 General Election.

In many ways, it's like a Shakespearean tragedy; Macbeth, I would say.

So, assuming Labour wins the 2010 election (and there's about twenty months to go... anything could happen) then I'd imagine Brown will stand down in 2012 or 2013 (after the Olympics).

If he loses in 2010, he'll have no choice but to resign straight away. That's assuming he makes it to 2010, given the rumours and plots floating around Westminster at the moment.




posted on Jul, 24 2008 @ 12:59 PM
link   
reply to post by Ste2652
 


Will the Labour party keep Gordon Brown as PM and give him the opportunity to fight at least one general election?

I suspect that would depend very much of the Glasgow East by-election results. If Labour lose, there will be a challenge to the Labour leader and I think there would be a hunger in the party to change and give a new leader the time to establish themself. If course, this would lead to calls for a ealry general election from the opposition and many in the media and the country as would have have two unelected prime ministers in a row.

What is more interesting for me, is the threadhold of a reduced Labour majority in Glasgow East that would still spark calls for a new Labour leader.



posted on Jul, 24 2008 @ 01:13 PM
link   
reply to post by Freedom ERP
 


Glasgow East is difficult to read. Turnout in this constituency is generally low (and there's a festival going on at present), it's a very deprived area (one of the most deprived in the UK) and the SNP are still popular in Scotland.

I think Labour will win, though. The majority will be reduced (it's hard to say by how much, however - especially since the turnout is difficult to read) and Gordon will hang on at least until conference season. If he does reasonably well, I doubt the conference will be a big problem... September is going to be very interesting politically.



posted on Jul, 24 2008 @ 01:28 PM
link   
This smacks of someone hanging on by their fingernails, and making promises to ensure that they are there to fight at least one election.

It sounds as though deals are being made left, right and centre (pardon the pun) and that prudence is desperate to hang on.

It remains to be seen if his party stabs him in the back, or if he actually does get to fight the election - personally I'm not too sure he will.

At the moment he looks like he's bitten off morew than he can chew.

There's also the question of just how far into debt he will drive the country, leaving the next leader (whoever it is) to pick up the pieces - something I still think bliar did to him, to a lesser extent.



posted on Jul, 24 2008 @ 05:03 PM
link   

Originally posted by budski
There's also the question of just how far into debt he will drive the country, leaving the next leader (whoever it is) to pick up the pieces - something I still think bliar did to him, to a lesser extent.


Usually, an outgoing government leaves a lot of economic baggage for the incoming government to deal with... whether it be debt, unemployment, inflation, high interest rates or whatever.

I saw a bit of criticism of Alastair Darling the other day over breaking/rewording the so-called 'Golden Rules' of the Treasury. In his defence, one of his allies apparently said: "What matters most to people? The Treasury rules or their kids' education?" I must concede that to him; the latter is probably more important to your average person on the street. Most people haven't even heard of the rules, except the media and those who follow politics closely.

As for Brown, I think he'll cling on. His position isn't as precarious as it was a few weeks ago, though. It seems to have stabilised since then. I don't think ditching him would change much; at this rate, the next election is David Cameron's to lose. I accept, of course, that things could change a lot between now and then. But based on the present, that's the way I see it.



posted on Jul, 25 2008 @ 02:57 AM
link   
With the loss of the Glasgow East seat for Labour, the calls for the Labour party to consider its leadership option will only grow louder.

The real question, will someone be prepared to stand against Gordon Brown who has the potential to be a creditable leader rather than just a storking horse to force an election that may bring the bigger guns out.



posted on Jul, 25 2008 @ 04:41 AM
link   

Originally posted by Freedom ERP
The real question, will someone be prepared to stand against Gordon Brown who has the potential to be a creditable leader rather than just a storking horse to force an election that may bring the bigger guns out.


It's a poisoned chalice... who would want the leadership? I appreciate that a new leader might turn things round, but I doubt the potential leadership candidates see it that way. At best it might be that a new leader could limit the damage done to Labour at the next election. People will be very cautions before toppling Brown; I don't think it's as clear cut a choice as it first seems.



posted on Jul, 25 2008 @ 01:50 PM
link   
reply to post by Ste2652
 


I agree and who would want the job!!!

But I am sure there are people in the Labour party who would want a crack at the top job. I have heard Jack Straw's name mentioned but he is a high profile name.

Is there is a challenge to Gordon Brown, will there be a storking horse first and who might that be?

And at least this will make the summer more interesting and give the AP boys something to talk about beside the US elections



posted on Aug, 16 2008 @ 08:37 PM
link   
reply to post by Ste2652
 


each day Gordon brown is in power
thats another nail in the Labour coffin



posted on Aug, 17 2008 @ 07:34 AM
link   
The following is my opinion as a member participating in this discussion.


I agree with Bodrul, however I don't think Labour is electable whoever is in charge, because they've reached the "Thatcher point" - and by that I mean that they've stopped doing what got them there in the first place, stopped listening to anything anyone says and instead are imposing themselves because they think that they can get away with it.

The election rules need revamping. We need proportional representation and also to do away with party whips. Maybe then some common sense will prevail and we can get some better government.


As an ATS Staff Member, I will not moderate in threads such as this where I have participated as a member.



posted on Aug, 17 2008 @ 08:10 AM
link   

Originally posted by Ste2652
[In many ways, it's like a Shakespearean tragedy; Macbeth, I would say.



A tragedy you say??

Among his many crimes Gordon Brown as the ex chancellor managed to single handedly destroy the Public pension fund.

He has borrowed so much money from futures that we are now facing a recession of massive proportions.

Sustained growth he said.... No more Boom and Bust he said...

What we have here is a massive increase in amplitude of the boom and bust of yesteryear.

Thing is, with such a slow growth projected due to the massive deficit brought about by Gordon Brown and Labour it will take a very very long time to come out of a recession which is now looming...

Labour say we cannot control the world stage.... But surely they should have planned for the eventuality and saved some £££???? Goodness knows they tax us all enough!!!

Gordon Brown no doubt will blame Alistair Darling for the UK's economic short comings... but... The rest of us with our eyes firmly open know where the blame squarely sits...

Blair was the glamour puppet head for this stupid uncharismatic PM we have sadly found ourselves with.

Admitting he will leave if he wins Gordon has yet again failed to see the point.... Who will vote for Gordon?? The people that actually eat up his BS... But he won't be around after those people vote so...

The question is will those people still support him??

Labour has been grooming the home secretary Jacqui Smith for the position. They hope a woman will swing the vote in their favour..

When I think of the next general election I think 1997 landslide Conservatives Win.

I can go on for a very long time talking about all the stupendous things labour has done over these last 10 years, but I won't, unless someone asks..

Power to the People!!

NeoN HaZe

[edit on 17-8-2008 by Neon Haze]



posted on Aug, 18 2008 @ 12:01 PM
link   
I can't see Labour winning a general election with or without Gordon Brown. The damage is already done, and they've been in power long enough to stop blaming others for the UK's problems. But then again, politics is a funny old game so you never know what will happen.



new topics

top topics



 
3

log in

join