Morning:
13°c
New leader would not mean election
Baroness Blackstone08.06.09
Most political commentators assume that if there is a new leader of the Labour Party there would have to be an immediate general election.
They are wrong. There is nothing in the British Constitution that requires one, nor is there any recent precedent, irrespective of party.
When Alec Douglas-Home replaced Harold Macmillan, when Jim Callaghan took over from Harold Wilson, when John Major succeeded Margaret Thatcher, and when Gordon Brown took over from Tony Blair, a general election was not triggered.
The fact there might be a second change of party leader makes no difference. British general elections are not presidential.
We elect a political party to govern us, based on the policies set out in its manifesto.
I do not know whether there will be a leadership contest in the Labour Party or not.
But if there is and we have a new prime minister, then there would be at most nine months before a general election.
Rather than call a snap vote, it would be sensible for a new PM to clarify priorities and implement policies. The electorate can then make a more considered judgement at an election.
There is no doubt opposition parties would call for an immediate election. They can be faced down though.
Only a vote of no confidence in the Commons can force a general election, and while the governing party has an overall majority that is highly unlikely. The power to call an election lies with the prime minister alone.
A new leader could exert this power but would be wiser to bring in a Bill for fixed-term parliaments, with the election fixed for May 2010. It would remove uncertainty, speculation and the party of government having an advantage.
Above all, the electorate would admire a PM for having the guts to give up the prerogative.
Finally, many voters would agree that the mess of allowances in the Commons needs to be sorted before an election.
It would be unfortunate if new members were to arrive in an un-reformed House. Moreover, more heads are likely to roll and constituency parties need time to go through proper selection processes.
So whatever determines the views of Labour MPs on the leadership in the coming days, it should not be the supposed inevitability of an early general election.
Reader views (13)
Whatever Baroness Blackstone's views or the strict constitutional position, I seem to recall that in the Autumn, when Brown's position as leader seemed to be under threat, Jack Straw (no doubt in trying to scare MPs and thus protect Brown) stated that in the event of a change, a new leader would have to call a general election.
- Cm, Twickenham
Labour has already broken its explicit promise that Tony Blair would serve a full term and instead foisted Gordon Brown on an unwilling populace. That electorate has responded by taking every opportunity possible to register its protest, but has been ignored by Labour.
The electorate will never forgive Labour if it tries the same underhand trick twice in two years.
- David Boycott, London, UK
Can I just pre-empt Keith Price from Luton - on this issue.
'I firmly believe that A.N. Other Labour-Stooge is the right man/woman to lead the nation. I fully support Mr/Ms Other - Well done A.N. Other - another triumph!
eeerily similar isn't it to robot spouted mantra
'Global, Global, started in America, Jobs, Real jobs, British jobs for British workers, getting on with the job of ruining the nation etc etc.'
Keith Price from Luton...I salute your indefatigueabilty!
- Ethan, UK
Heaven forfend that the people should want to choose who governs them. The only reason there are not riots on the street is because it is the left, the traditional rioters that are the ones taking democracy for a ride. When the election comes and it will, whether now or in May 2010 the Labour party will be annihilated for exactly these sort of views that treat the British people as nothing more than a distraction from the business of spending our money.
- Richard Holloway, London
And another unelected Labour apparatchic thinks they can ride roughshod over Democracy in this country. Yet we are supposed to believe that Brown wants to stay in Office so he can reform our Constitution and strengthen our Democracy. Every time one of his unelected apologists open their mouth they make it clearer and clearer that they are anti-Democracy.
In one respect she is right. The Party was elected to deliver its Manifesto. SO WHERE'S OUR REFERENDUM ON THE LISBON CONSTITUTION/TREATY?
AND WHY ISN'T BLAIR STILL PRIME MINISTER? HE CAMPAIGNED AND WAS ELECTED PROMISING TO SERVE A FULL THIRD TERM.
As for the rest of the Manifesto - its been blown out of the water by the economic catastrophe Gordon Brown is largely responsible for.
Baroness Blackstone - whoever she is - is kidding herself if she thinks someone else can take over and there not be a General Election.
- Boudicca, Guildford, England
Only an unelected politician could think - and even worse publicly write - about appointing a second unelected PM.
Of course, if the aim of the Labour Party is to commit electoral suicide, go right ahead.
And if you keep Mr Brown as PM, that's electoral suicide as well..
So are you feeling lucky?
(What a useless spineless lot who clearly have nothing but contempt for VOTERS)
- Madasafish, Stoke on trent, UK
So, an unelected politician purports to tell us that an unprecedented second mid-term change of Prime Minister is no reason for a General Election.
So much for politicians muttering about learning the lessons from recent results and endeavouring to reconnect with ordinary voters!
- Ken Stevens, Reading England
This is a very good recipe for a bloody revolution. If you try to continue to govern without a mandate, expect to pay the price. The people of this country are very near to breaking point and will show their anger
- Chas, London
"We elect a political party to govern us, based on the policies set out in its manifesto." Then can we have the European referendum that we were promised?
- Dearieme, cambridgeshire
Constitutional reforms are a dead duck. Cammo won't support them and there's not enough time to force them through the HoC and Lords before the next election.
The only way they'd get enacted is if they favour the Conservatives (such as a wide-ranging reform by the boundaries commission)...
- Richard, Birmingham, UK
Quite right--but one key issue has been ommitted from this and that is the current anger and mood of the electorate.
It would be better and thus wise of a newly "appointed" PM to spend a little time formulating strategy and policy,redefining the "allowances" rules and regulations, and settling in the newly elected Speaker. After that he/she should make it clear to the country that it would then be both timely and appropriate for them to have their say. October 2009 would be absolutely right for this. An election any later would be a complete wipe out for Labour.
- William Grierson, Kimpton-UK
Constitutional reforms are certainly needed but we can't leave the job to this desperate, fag-end government. Everyone knows that all Labour will do is try to fix the electoral system to help keep some of them in jobs; and because no-one wants to give money to the Labour Party they'll also try to bring in state funding to force the taxpayer to give them money instead.
The proper way to introduce reform is for each party to set out their proposals in their general election manifesto. Then the party which wins will have the necessary mandate for reform.
- Ian, London
Whilst your article is indeed factually correct. Compare it with the expenses furore. Acting within the rules is simply not acceptable when you know it to be wrong.
Yet another shoddy PM from Labour, without the benefit of a proper mandate of an election is 'within the rules' but is far from morally right and everybody knows it.
If these Labour MP's loved the nation as much as they do slurping down our cash expenses they would resign en masse and force an election. But I'm sure your right in that gutter morality and self interest will make sure we suffer under fools for another 11 months.
- Ethan, UK
