View Full Version : How can we get rid of Gordon Brown??

Dan D'air
5th Sep 2008, 22:17
Everyone I seem to talk to has had enough of the bloke, he is making a royal mess of being PM and short of a Labour challenge, there doesn't seem to be any Constitutional way of removing him. Therefore, I propose a thread, using fellow PPRuNers ingenuity, to suggest ways of removing him legally before he can do any further damage to the country.

For starters, here are a few of my thoughts:

1) Let the Military deal with him, (as mentioned about Wilson by Andrew Marr in his book)

2) Have him removed for being (in my opinion) mentally ill. (See the Guido Fawkes blog re the Prime Mentalist)

3) Sue him personally in court for financial loss as he has effed up my pension and house value. (Well he was Chancellor for 10 years)

4) Try to catch him doing a John Prescott and (willingly) give the pictures to the News of the World. (It is party conference season after all.)

More suggestions will be very gratefully received, but please hurry, Britain can't take very much more.

5th Sep 2008, 22:30
I thought the IRA tried to drop a Boeing 777 on him - and failed ? About the only theory that fits ?

Dan D'air
5th Sep 2008, 22:33
Can't be true, they are Officialy closed. It must be true, as the Monitoring Commission said so...................

Sir George Cayley
5th Sep 2008, 22:40
Patience, mon brave, patience.

By the time EASA rule all things aviation Gordon and the whole labour party will be gone. Replaced by the Conservatives in a landslide victory:D

Years later we'll all be sick of them and the New new, no really new labia party will sweep back in.

It actually, doesn't matter a jot whose in power. As we have seen graphically in recent times world macro economics are the arbiter of our well being, not the twats prating at PM question time.

As an exercise, if you are over 40, try and match your ups and downs of income to the Govt of the day without resorting to Google to help you remember the year. Difficult innit?

Rid ourselves of Gordon? Time and God will do that for us.

Sir George (I remember Pitt the Elder) Cayley

5th Sep 2008, 22:42
I believe there is a formal procedure that allows HRH to dissolve a government. I'm sure more learned persons may expand on this.


5th Sep 2008, 22:57
Shoot the beggar......:*
Any willing volunteers, form up on my right, oh yes, bring a gun, if you have one...'cos Lablur banned 'em...forgot that bit.....:ugh:
Can't run him over, due to "Traffic Calming aka Speed Traps"
Knives,:ok: they haven't quite got rid of them yet... So, next March 15th...
Gord, beware the Ides of March....:E

6th Sep 2008, 02:45
Bleedin' hell - make yer fecking minds up! You've already got some muslim git being hauled through the courts for trying to top Gordon. Why didn't you just let him get on with it?

6th Sep 2008, 03:16
It will make no difference, just different (political) snouts in the same trough.

6th Sep 2008, 06:56
How can we get rid of Gordon Brown??
Errr ... at the risk of stating the bleeding obvious ... you get enough people to vote for the other team.

However, given the complete apathy of many Brits when it comes to exercising their right to vote versus the enthusiastic way they embrace their right to whinge, whine, bleat and complain without actually doing anything ... I don't fancy yer chances.

Der absolute Hammer
6th Sep 2008, 07:13
So far, at least you have all expressed....

Incitement to military usurpation.
Criminal libel of First Lord of the Treasury.
Expression of support for recognized terrorist group.
Invocation of divine being to remove head of government.
Incitement to assassinate.
Incitement to armed revolt.
Incitement to carry firearms.
Incitement to carry knives.
Further support for known terrorist under detention.

Watch out.
You are all probably in contravention of this....

(CONTINUANCE in force of sections 1-9)ORDER 2008.

If your children read this and report, you may be locked up without charge or lawyer until the House of Commons debates case?

Buster Hyman
6th Sep 2008, 07:15
Tell the unions he's a secret Tory...

Krystal n chips
6th Sep 2008, 07:33

A succinct and accurate assessment of the UK populace there I have to say :ok::E

Voter apathy is something that I have long considered to be actively encouraged by all parties,,,,saves all those awkward questions from the plebs after all as to why WE voted for you....and thus questions about all those hollow "promises" made during the 3 week self marketing campaign masquerading as electioneering every few years now doesn't it......hence if a Gov't encourages the dumbing down of TV and such emphasis is placed on "celebs" and "brave Dazza vows to beat pain barrier of chipped nail to play for Ingurlund" then clearly the plebs will be happy.....and the :mad:politicitians can indulge themselves in their personal ego massaging....and screwing the public purse at the same time.

Simple answer to the OP however......get the f£$k out of the UK !.....you know it makes sense :ok:

tony draper
6th Sep 2008, 08:22
Ask Mrs Queen to sack him,she can yer know, she sacked one of they Oz prime ministers as I recall,she can't have their heads cut off now though ,which seems a pity.
What I think this country needs is a return to absolute monarchy,put a end to this everybody can vote democracy nonsense,it has caused no end of trouble.

Dan D'air
6th Sep 2008, 08:27
Ah, Good Morning Admiral, I was awaiting your sage input hopefully and with baited breath. I couldn't agree more with your fine sentiments, methinks that the Queen would do a fine job, after all, she has these last sixty plus years. As for democracy, we don't seem to have anything more than an 'Elf 'n Safety police state these days. Winston will be turning in his grave.

6th Sep 2008, 09:18
Quote: How can we get rid of Gordon Brown??
Errr ... at the risk of stating the bleeding obvious ... you get enough people to vote for the other team.

The point beng we want shot of him now, not in 2 years time. He just won't take the hint, which will only make it worse for Labour in the long run.

Matthew Parris has seen him as a wrong 'un for quite a while, others now accept he was right. He has the right of it in The Times today as well.

Power is lost. Can Labour find its self-respect? (http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/comment/columnists/matthew_parris/article4686369.ece)
Gordon Brown's flailing leadership is now a national emergency. His party must show it has the stomach to tackle it

Effluent Man
6th Sep 2008, 09:37
There are quite a few on here would see Matthew Parris as a wrong un for activities not connected to politics.

The thread said "legally" and that narrows your options considerably.Your best hope would be to join the Labour Party and try to depose him from inside.The trouble is many activists like him because he is seen as less right wing than Blair.Although my guess is on a free vote they would oust him in favour of someone much more left wing.

tony draper
6th Sep 2008, 09:44
Apparently a lot of peeps would like to see our Tone return,one predicted this upon his departure.:E

6th Sep 2008, 10:11
Okay, I'll bite.

Some excellent right wing rhetoric on this thread!

Dan - How much has your house gone down in value in the past 15 years?

If you're talking about the decline in the past few months I think you'll find that this is due to the actions of that well known socialist rabble, the bankers.

6th Sep 2008, 10:28
... she sacked one of they Oz prime ministers as I recall ...
Actually, it was the Governor General, Kerr, who dismissed Gough Whitlam. The Speaker (Gordon Scholes) was instructed to advise Kerr that several motions of confidence in the Labor government had been passed in the senate but Kerr refused to see Scholes until AFTER Parliament had been dissolved.

As a result, it was Scholes who wrote to the Queen, but her reply firmly indicated that she would not involve herself in any Australian political conflict.

This is what her Private Secretary wrote on her behalf ...

I am commanded by The Queen to acknowledge your letter of 12th November about the recent political events in Australia. You ask that The Queen should act to restore Mr. Whitlam to office as Prime Minister. As we understand the situation here, the Australian Constitution firmly places the prerogative powers of the Crown in the hands of the Governor-General as the representative of the Queen of Australia. The only person competent to commission an Australian Prime Minister is the Governor-General, and The Queen has no part in the decisions which the Governor-General must take in accordance with the Constitution. Her Majesty, as Queen of Australia, is watching events in Canberra with close interest and attention, but it would not be proper for her to intervene in person in matters which are so clearly placed within the jurisdiction of the Governor-General by the Constitution Act.
I understand that you have been good enough to send a copy of your letter to the Governor-General so I am writing to His Excellency to say that the text of your letter has been received her in London and has been laid before the The Queen.
I am sending a copy of this letter to the Governor-General.
17 November 1975

So it was all down to Sir John Kerr but the Queen could dismiss a Brit Prime Minister ... well, in theory anyway. The only other option, as has been said, is a challenge to his leadership from within the party. That's about it, really ... you may just have to wait out the two years.

6th Sep 2008, 11:34
The point beng we want shot of him now, not in 2 years time.

No doubt the master of cut and paste and self-anointed oracle of Pprune will be able to dredge up any number of sites backing this latest kindergarten-level response. Let him. ORAC's increasingly hysterical right-wing leanings are becoming obvious from his posts on the American election thread. It seems to me he used to pretend to exercise a degree of objectivity, but that has disappeared and he has descended into the mire of the left-right dichotomy that so occupies people's thoughts.

A shame really. What the first world needs is bilateral discussion, not increasingly ideology-based nonsense masquerading as political discourse. Me, I've just about given up on finding it anywhere. It sure doesn't appear to be available on Jet Blast.

Der absolut hammer summed it all up neatly in his post #11 of 0613 today. Be careful what you wish for, great thinkers, for you will surely get it.

6th Sep 2008, 12:34
ORAC's increasingly hysterical right-wing leanings are becoming obvious from his posts on the American election thread. That's what passes for reasoned debate in Oz then, Binos?

I think you'll find the vast majority of the UK population want rid of Gordon Brown. But, having failed to persuade the Americans on who should lead them, you're now ready to start on the UK.

Hysterically (that's the hysterical ha-ha Binos), the most popular replacement for Gordon would be ........Tony Blair (http://ukpress.google.com/article/ALeqM5j_nCIHsfxpOW4eXd4ECT1_9h86yA).

What's the old song lyric, "Don't it always seem to go, that you don't know what you've got till it's gone; they paved paradise and put up a parking lot"....

6th Sep 2008, 12:43
That wasn't debate, ORAC, it was an observation putting your objectivity to the test.

I have no objection whatever to Gordon Brown being given the royal heave ho by the voters of Britain. I think, as Blue Diamond suggested somewhat earlier, that is the whole point of the democratic process, is it not?

If you're going to throw your toys out of the pram because you can't wait for the result but "I want it now!" you're not doing your carefully cultivated reputation as a thinker much good.

I don't care who runs the faded remnants of the Empire. I just feel moved occasionally to point out the hypocrisy of those who don't get their own way yet insist they believe fervently in democracy and in particular the Westminster version of it. Make up your mind.

And in the meantime, keep commenting on the US election. I notice your views don't receive the same criticism from the usual suspects on that thread as those with opposing views. Why doesn't that surprise me?

6th Sep 2008, 13:01
That wasn't debate, ORAC, it was an observation putting your objectivity to the test.

I have no objection whatever to Gordon Brown being given the royal heave ho by the voters of Britain. I think, as Blue Diamond suggested somewhat earlier, that is the whole point of the democratic process, is it not?

If you're going to throw your toys out of the pram because you can't wait for the result but "I want it now!" you're not doing your carefully cultivated reputation as a thinker much good.

Not at all Binos, you're just showing you have an as appalling grasp of the UK parliamentary system as that of the U.S.A.

Gordon Brown wasn't elected to PM at an election, only as an MP. Whilst nobody is elected as the PM, Tony Blair pledging before the last election that he would "serve a full term" before standing down.

The Labour party elected Gordon Brown to replace Tony Blair without a vote; so not only does he have no democratic vote of the country for his position, he doesn't even have a democratic mandate within his own party.

There are many who put forward the view that, in such circumstances, Gordon Brown should go to the country to acquire a mandate; that was precisely what he considered autumn before he chickened out.

Brown cannot be removed from office by the public until the next election - and only then by voting so that the Labour party cannot form the government. At which stage they can keep him as their leader if they wish (but I think not).

People are, however, more than entitled to make clear their views on his performance and let the Labour party know they want him gone now. if they decide to remove him, well and good. If not, the consequences at the next election are being spelt out in starker and starker terms in each successive poll.

He ought to resign for the good of his party, but I doubt he will.

6th Sep 2008, 13:05
I do not think Mr Bean will lead the Labour Party into the next election, the Unions are likely to stop him in his tracks.
The unions are once again Labours paymasters, if the unions withdraw funding, the Labour Party and Mr Bean would go into bankruptcy.
The Unions will want something in return for their “Kindness”. I am sure if Mr Bean does not roll over they might not be so kind, they have already stated they would be willing to use all means at their disposal in order to influence the Government.
The problem facing Mr Bean is that he has nothing to give, he has recklessly spent all the money.
Happy Days.

Utrinque Apparatus
6th Sep 2008, 13:11
The democratic process in UK has been under sustained attack ever since the now patently failed New Labour spinmeisters got into power. Brown is a default position due to a certainly questionable, if not downright unconstitutional, seedy little pact with Bliar in the Granita restaurant, not the House of Commons where such important decisions should be taken.

There is no question that Brown is a lame duck, and his decision making prowess is somewhat lacking to say the least. Not one right call in ten years and a reputation built initially on prudent application of the previous Tory Government's economic policies until he quietly destroyed the country's economic strengths by the old Labour tax and spend with all the benefits wasted on his "vision" of Britain

Why should the Country suffer two more years of this "Granita elected" buffoon and his total incompetence, or that of his discredited Government ? There is no confidence in Labour across the board so why should we place the country's well being in any further jeopardy at the hands of a proven coterie of fourth raters ?

6th Sep 2008, 13:16
I think you'll find the vast majority of the UK population want rid of Gordon Brown.

How exactly would we find that?


6th Sep 2008, 13:23
Every opinion poll for the last 6 months for a start. You're entitled to ignore them if you wish, as is the Labour party.

6th Sep 2008, 13:30
And just what part of my understanding of the UK parliamentary system, which is the underscoring of my own country's system, is so appallingly misjudged? Perhaps I could ask if that is what passes for reasoned debate in the twin systems you claim to inhabit?

Brown cannot be removed from office by the public until the next election .....

Precisely. So where is the problem? You are implying this is unfair, when it clearly is part of the precious Westminster system. Or are you suggesting it's illegal as opposed to what you would prefer?

Time passes. We look back. Good and bad leaders are eventually removed through the whims of the public. If some argue that 80% of that public vote should be disqualified because they are chavs gypsies blacks chinks pakis muslims liberals and other undesirabless detrimental to the noble cause of WASP-ishness, they are going to have to either take the awkward role of getting into parliament and changing things rather than bitching from the sidelines, or change their attitude to what a democracy really is.

Effluent Man
6th Sep 2008, 14:02
ORAC, What you need to explain is how Margaret Thatcher handed over to John Major in 1990 without an election.Clearly you cannot expect one party to do the honourable thing when their opponents have demonstrated clearly that they see the current procedure as being acceptable.

6th Sep 2008, 14:20
I'd make 4 points.

1. Thatcher didn't hand over, she was ousted when the party responded to her unpopularity (hint).

2. Neither she, nor the party, promised she would serve a full term.

3. The party then had a full, contested, election to replace her.

4. Major took over in November 1990, the next election was in April 1992, 18 months later, which Major won by over 14 million votes, the highest popular vote recorded by a British PM.

In contrast, in the view of the public as shown in numerous polls, Brown replaced a leader who had promised to serve a full term; was seen as having been appointed in an undemocratic way and is wildly unpopular.

As I have previously stated, the Labour party don't have to replace him, he can serve onto the next date there has to be an election in 2010. Maybe they think the polls will turn around by then and the country will be out of the recession.

However, the public are just as entitled to campaign for the party to replace him and to point out the consequences if they don't.

I certainly do not find it in anyway undemocratic or wrong to campaign for his immediate replacement.

Politically he's even more of a lame duck than GWB and has no more credibility outside the country than in.

6th Sep 2008, 14:43
So in effect we agree that the traditions of parliamentary democracy under the Westminster system are intact. There is nothing illegal, unethical or immoral about Brown waiting to face the voters at the next election. You just don't like it.

You, and apparently Dan D'Air, find it irritating and apparently advocate illegal methods of getting your own way. I'll take it as just another amusing tongue in cheek way of expressing an opinion.

After all, the system is bigger than any of us, is it not? And if it isn't, do we have a problem?

6th Sep 2008, 15:10
There is nothing illegal, unethical or immoral about Brown waiting to face the voters at the next election. You just don't like it. Illegal no, unethical and immoral yes.

You, and apparently Dan D'Air, find it irritating and apparently advocate illegal methods of getting your own way. Please justify that comment by pointing out anywhere I have suggested or proposed illegal means or withdraw it with an apology.

6th Sep 2008, 15:29
No problem. You apologise for your unfounded accusation of my appalling grasp of my own country's political system, and I'll apologise for whatever it is you want me to apologise for. Perhaps then reasoned debate can be resumed.

Perhaps while you're at it you could could explain how it is immoral or unethical to do something entirely within the bounds of the country's political laws. I'm sure that could open a can of worms.

6th Sep 2008, 15:49
His replacing Tony Blair was unethical as it was wrong in terms of fidelity to the promise made during the election. It was immoral in that, having knowing breached that undertaking, he did not abide by his decision to hold an early election to obtain a personal mandate to justify it.

My accusation concerning your knowledge of the UK parliamentary system was based on the fact that you imputed that wishing Gordon Blair replaced before the next election was undemocratic. It is not, he was put into power without an election he can be replaced without an election, it is not undemocratic to campaign for such.

Your accusation is that I advocated illegal means for his replacement, which I have not. That accusation could be considered libelous.

6th Sep 2008, 15:57
OK. So sue me. In the meantime let's return the thread to where it belonged.

Bern Oulli
6th Sep 2008, 17:02
Why not simply leave Mr Brown alone? He is more than capable of sinking New Labour without trace come the next election and I for one would hate to do anything that might spoil his current level of incompetence. I grant you that the probable 2 year wait is a bit of an irritation though, but all good things come to those who wait.

Der absolute Hammer
6th Sep 2008, 17:21
Military coup would be a good idea perhaps? Generals often try to lead by example and when becoming too corrupt are usually shot.

6th Sep 2008, 17:29
I didn't want to fit this type of tyre to my car, I know from previous experience they're over-priced, over-rated and not fit for purpose. However, I was out voted and they were fitted against my will.

They've never stayed airtight for long and they're no good in the dry, let alone in the wet. Almost every week one of them has had at least one puncture. Now the whole set have gone flat and the tread's all gone. If we reach the next motorway services, those who outvoted me agree that the whole set will be thrown away. Hopefully there's a different brand worth fitting.

Oh, sorry, was this about politics?

Der absolute Hammer
6th Sep 2008, 18:51
There is!


6th Sep 2008, 19:39
Why not start here?:


6th Sep 2008, 21:56
You people should watch out.

I'm noting your comments and I know where you live.

You can stuff your petition where the sun doesn't shine, I'm here for the next 20 months.

Dissent will not be tolerated. I've got a job to do and I'm going to do it regardless of the fact that I'm the most inept failure this country has ever seen in this job.

See? I really don't give a toss what you think.

I got this job because I wanted it and me 'n Tone did a deal that I would get it, not because I'm qualified for it or because you wanted me.

Nothing's changed. I still want it. We won't be re-elected in 2010 even if the Angel Gabriel becomes Party Leader, so who gives a shit about what goes wrong before then. I like the pay, the cars, and Chequers, and I'm not giving them up, any more than the Labour MPs, who are unemployable in the real world, will rock the boat and risk losing their pay and allowances before they have to, just like that poofter Parris said.

G. Brown, PM.

6th Sep 2008, 22:24
you get enough people to vote for the other team.

Ironically, Bluey, I tried to oust our local Labour MP in the last two elections - we are in a marginal seat, and every vote really does count (well, obviously they always do but you know what I mean). Trouble was that the Tories and the Lib Dems, the two closest run rivals, could not agree which measure to use to decide who should get the "anything but Tony" vote. In the event, I voted for the wrong lot, the nearest miss (by a horribly narrow margin) was by the other lot, and the Tonyite got back in.

Now, on the other hand, I think Gordon is picking up the pieces from long years of Tonyite populist policy, and I am prepared to let him complete the job. I certainly quake in horror at the thought of what Dave's lot would do to resurrect the economy at this stage.

7th Sep 2008, 09:36
Its true - BBC1 -Rory Bremner has just said that police looking for members of the GB plot have narrowed the suspects down to 60 million...:}

Beatriz Fontana
7th Sep 2008, 09:56

I'm noting your comments and I know where you live.

No you don't. You lost the laptop with that data on it a long time ago!!

7th Sep 2008, 11:20

And we replace GB with what?


Opinion polls mean nothing. Only elections do.



Dan D'air
7th Sep 2008, 11:32

Frank Field would be a good move, John Denham another. They are both decent, bright men with (dare I say it) integrity. They both worked for Blair, who realised that they were on to him and promptly got rid of them.

Of course, the ideal thing would be not to have a Labour government at all, but we are going to have to wait until 2010, as Gordon is a power-crazed megalomaniac who will bring everyone around him down in his desperation to cling on to power.

7th Sep 2008, 12:27
On the same prog today as Rory Bremner's brilliant piece, the aptly named Ed Balls let loose a stream of drivel about education, Labour's bright future, Gordon's the best man for the job, Britain has no real economic problems.etc etc etc.

In the course of making it up and losing all touch with reality in the process, he got so far into Fairyland (not M Parris' fairyland, but the actual Fairyland) that at one point he said that the bright sunny uplands of the future under Labour would involve Universities and PCTs, among other bodies that I've forgotten, in the development of his vision of a fabulous new educat..........

Hang about; PCT's are in charge of doctors surgeries and things like that, aren't they?

Beatriz Fontana
7th Sep 2008, 15:57
Bremner was superb on the Marr show this morning (Ed Balls really reminds me of Ben Swain from The Thick of It). In the wrap-up at the end of the show, he says about Gordon:

"I do feel sorry for Gordon Brown. The poor guy, he's only got one eye, he hasn't slept for ten years, English is his second language. And not only has he got to run the country, but he's got to run the bank as well - Northern Rock. David Cameron said something and he said 'cashier number five, please'..."

Marvellous! :D

7th Sep 2008, 16:20
There is a seperate thread on "Uneducated Politicians" on PPRUNE.I bet even I would get a Degree in History - FFS - I'm doing one in ICT with the OU Hard work and I don't mind - I get Sweet Jack Sh*t from our benificient State, don't even think of bringing TB back - He might possibly come . As for the current encumbent - list his acheivements 1) getting rid of the 10% Tax band, his support for the Iraq War - possibly the greatest catastrophe for the West since Munich 1938 and his perceived dithering over Northern Rock (That is the bank system's fault) and not forgetting the Election that never was - We are now off to Hell in a hand Cart and "New Labour" is pulling it.
Can we impeach the PM ? - I'm an old Socialist. It is that Bad . PS What's Hubris ?

tony draper
7th Sep 2008, 18:46
That Edd Balls is as crazy as a shit house rat, you just got to look at his eyes to see that, and that Millipede is a cockroach.

Beatriz Fontana
8th Sep 2008, 18:03
It seems I'm not the only one who has spotted the similarities between the fictional Ben Swaine and the should-be-fictional Education Secretary Ed Balls. Fawkes (http://www.order-order.com/2008/09/is-balls-re-launching-himself.html) is picking on the blinking... which if you've seen The Thick of It, this is what the spin doctors were worried about Swaine...

And the tie-less look - something that the fictional Tory spinmeisters were concerned with...!

Meanwhile, I have just cried watching this topical re-working of Downfall (http://www.order-order.com/2008/09/gordon-browns-downfall-prequel.html) (much better than Hitler's motorbike)....

8th Sep 2008, 23:24
Gordon Brown's Downfall - the Prequel. (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iMi776jah1w)

9th Sep 2008, 00:31
You reap what you sow...for heavens sakes people. Some of you somewhere voted the Labour party in. The Cons will be little better and frankly thereafter who else is there to vote for.

I would seriously consider a rank outsider, say, Jeremy Clarkson et al.

Oh why bother, I'm just so tired of the whole lot of them.

Guy Fawkes was right.

9th Sep 2008, 00:44
Clarkson would make juice cheaper, better for the airline industry too.
Cameron's pushbike worries me! :ugh:

9th Sep 2008, 01:02
Best PM we never had..Tony Benn. He talks in 'man in the street' lingo.


Utrinque Apparatus
9th Sep 2008, 16:03
Man in the street ? Well, OK, but only in that there are a lot of loonies out there on the street

12th Sep 2008, 17:57
BBC: Whip out of job after leader call (http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/7613086.stm)

Siobhain McDonagh is the most senior Labour MP to call for a contest
A junior member of the government is out of a job after breaking ranks to call for a challenge to Gordon Brown as party leader.

Government whip Siobhain McDonagh said she wanted to "clear the air" about the leadership issue.

A government spokesman said that if Ms McDonagh has not resigned then she will be sacked. The source said her replacement had already been appointed. The source said Ms McDonagh had always been "Anti-Gordon".

Ms McDonagh - who was the only member of the government not to nominate Mr Brown for the party leadership last year - said she wanted a debate about the future of the party. She said "everybody" in government is talking about the leadership issue and she wanted such discussions to be out in the open.

"It's about time we let party members and people involved in the Labour Party and the wider community in on that debate," she told the BBC News Channel "I think we need to clear the air. I think whoever wants to stand for leader of the Labour Party should do so and we should have a good debate about the direction of the party and the government."

She said she did not have a particular candidate in mind.

She is so far the only member of the government to publicly call for a leadership contest. She is also thought to be among the Labour MPs to have sought details about the nomination process for a contest......

Low Flier
12th Sep 2008, 19:01
Guess who's at the bottom of the shitpile
BBC NEWS | Politics | Global popularity contest (http://newsvote.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/7595696.stm)

Medvedev (Russia) +47
Rudd (Aus) +25
Berlusconi (Italy) +13
Merkel (Germany) +2
Sarkozy (France) -8
Harper (Can) -11
Bush (US) -33
Fukuda (Jap) -34
Brown (UK) -47

12th Sep 2008, 19:27
There's a special delight in seeing the culprit responsible for destroying the pensions of many of the readers here, and selling the UK Gold Reserves at bargain basement prices wallowing in this embarrassing agony (surprise surprise, Sterling is collapsing! Could it be because he sold the UK gold reserves that backed Sterling up? Who can rely on the Pound now? Well done RB!). I hope he does not go too soon, the pain must be intense, and frankly it's fascinating to watch it so long drawn out- like a dinosaur slowly dying. It is better than watching that other awful PM, Major, and his awful government twisting in their death throes! Brown will hopefully be written right out of history. And that teenager Foreign Secretary has the gumption to think he might take over? Joke!

One hopes nothing too serious happens to the country in the meantime, because these idiots, of both parties, need their heads banging together!

Charley B
12th Sep 2008, 21:38
Looking at the dreadful state of the man,he looks a real wreck,he may well just collapse in a heap and that will be that!
THE QUICKER THAT PARTY GO THE BETTER---the country is in such a mess thanks to him and Blair!

13th Sep 2008, 00:38
There's a special delight in seeing the culprit responsible for destroying many readers here's private pensions ......

Oh dear! This from the self-proclaimed forum grammar nazi? What a particular delight!

13th Sep 2008, 09:01
As I write this the BBC are carrying a story about an MP Sacked from her role as a whip for having the timerity to ask for forms for a ballot to enable an election contest against the great one. Obviously its not Kim Jong Ill.

Lets have a reality check, "Neau Arbvite" had a decade to prepare a successor to the blessed T B - look hard at the whole process of the selection of the new anointed one. Blair if he had any intellect he would have assembled a cabenet of sufficient talent, with sufficient nouse to ensure an efficient transfer of responsibility, in the absence of a general election. Look very closely at the motley crew we have. Think of this as a CRM problem and compare and contrast with what you might have done on the flight deck, so to speak. If an airline was run like this - yeee gods. The question is not are they fit to govern, but are they fit to crap ? With the possible exeption of C Atley 1945- We've had procession of failure dressed up as choice/change/new oppertunity etc in the name of government. An elective dictatorship is not the answer. The body politic in the UK has started to rot - and I cannot smell the coffee.

(Crap Spelling/Grammer corrected in part)


13th Sep 2008, 14:07
I connot smell the coffie.

Let alone the spelling of it...... ;)

Der absolute Hammer
13th Sep 2008, 14:23
Point Shy Torqe but you say you live under the rainboe?

13th Sep 2008, 14:37
Last edited by Rainboe : Today at 09:32. Reason: disgraceful grammar, not to be forgiven

As of course it will never be, rainboe! We pedants are like that, as you would well know. I'm soooo glad I took the opportunity to preserve your original for posterity,

This of course will ensure a lifelong desire for retribution involving any possible typos, split infinitives or other horrors, but be assured that you will never find me posting something as egregious as your now preserved faux pas. :E

13th Sep 2008, 14:51
Once they are gone give it 20 years or so then another gullible generation will heed their honeyed words and vote them in for another stint at wrecking the country.

13th Sep 2008, 14:58
So, Sisemen, you proclaim yourself publicly as one of those whose voting intentions are permanent, no matter what happens to the country concerned in the meantime?

A courageous move, Minister, but one which to me throws serious doubt over your ability to make an objective political decision.

13th Sep 2008, 16:48
Can I have your origional post Back ? - I missed it - Sorry about the spelling it's not my strong point - As for grammer - Nope ! - As you can see Englitz Lunguage - was never my strong point. (My Spell checker is U/S)



13th Sep 2008, 18:16
from CATIII:

An elective dictatorship is not the answer

Aren't all democratically elected governments with healthy majorities de facto dictatorships? All the way to the Parliament Act.

Or in plain English, don't they all just screw us over?


13th Sep 2008, 19:03
Yes, all but the Swiss.

Good Point.

14th Sep 2008, 05:58
Oh dear! I had hoped that Binos would go away and hide somewhere - but no, he returns to the fray. Perhaps I should ignore him - most others have.

Mate, stay off the politics. You have some very useful and erudite things to say on other subjects but you seem to be like a terrier with a bone on politics.

I probably am a rusted on conservative voter - but that probably comes from a life time of experience of being continually disappointed at the mess that the left seem to leave us.

And before you continue the personal attacks you might wish to put into your mix the fact that I am (was) closely connected with some Ministerial policy making decisions on the previous State Labor government and have also been a potential candidate for the Nationals. Additionally, the Leader of the Liberals, Colin Barnett, is also a personal friend and was, at one time, a member of my electorate when I was an independent on the local council. Now you can't get more even handed than that Binos.

14th Sep 2008, 14:05
....you seem to be like a terrier with a bone on politics.

AS you so kindly admitted, I'm happy to share my wisdom across a broad range of topics. That's just the sort of generous guy I am.

No, the particular bone this terrier can't let go of is those whose political opinions never change and who repeat them ad nauseam. You are one of those if your posts on these pages are anything to go by.

I could, if absolutely necessary, point you towards a raft of posts over the years where I bemoan the adversarial system of politics which prevents the best minds from both sides getting together to make genuinely balanced decisions. Can you direct me to any similarly balanced posts you have made where you even accept that anybody left of you is not necessarily a moron? Please try.

So you were a potential Nat candidate, that doesn't surprise me. And you are friends with a high ranking politician of the Nats' coalition partners the Liberals. No surprises there either.

But wait!
I am (was) closely connected with some Ministerial policy making decisions on the previous State Labor government

Ahh! So you were employed by a government under Labor control! Well, you are correct, you can't get much more even handed than that!

Sorry, is that another personal attack? If so, would you mind pointing out the previous one? For someone so closely involved with politics you seem to have a pretty thin skin when it comes to the definition of a personal attack.

It must have been this zinger:
you proclaim yourself publicly as one of those whose voting intentions are permanent

to which you reply
I probably am a rusted on conservative voter.

Seems to me we are in basic agreement. Surely that couldn't have been the personal attack that so wounded you?

But that's what you get when you debate with the pseudo intelligent left. The gummint orta do something about it, I tell ya.

But there is another alternative for you. If you find there are too many pinkos wishing their brand of inevitable ruin on this country to be found on these pages, return to the home of conservatism; talk back radio. Those bloody commies don't get past the producer over there, and that's how it should be.

Always nice talking with you, so no, I don't think I'll go anywhere for a while. I've only resorted to the ignore function twice in my time on Pprune, both for people with little intelligence (pseudo or any other sort) and nothing of any value to say but who insisted on saying a lot anyway. Rest assured you aren't one of them, but may I suggest you use the same criteria? It's called freedom of choice.

14th Sep 2008, 15:33
No, I wasn't "employed" I was sought out by the Minister and appointed (presumably for my known even handed approach).

Your diatribe says more about you than me Binos

14th Sep 2008, 15:40
Oh come on, sisemen. Is that the best you can do? Diatribe? Why not trying answering any of my points?

presumably for my known even handed approach).

Yep, you've shown that repeatedly here. Please point me to one post where you have conceded the value of any opinion left of yours. Err, apart from Labor ministers seeking your advice in the interests of even-handedness, of course.

tony draper
14th Sep 2008, 21:10
However Mr Benn's son compensates for his apparent honesty, spouting lies from every orifice like a proper politician.:ok:

Beatriz Fontana
14th Sep 2008, 21:28
Cut to the chase! Have an election!

But that's the problem with British democracy, Basil, we can't because only the PM can call it and he aint'!!