• Gordon Brown will resign before the next Parliament
    36 replies, posted
[b]sorry, I can't edit the title anymore - there'll be a leadership election within Labour.[/b] (formal discussions between Labour and the Lib Dems are to happen, although that's another thing...) Currently writing this during his speech... this is the best source I have right now. Will get a full write-up if I don't have to sleep before then. [img]http://imgur.com/BLnth.png[/img] [QUOTE=starpluck;21857233][url]http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/37064821/ns/world_news-europe/[/url] [IMG]http://msnbcmedia1.msn.com/i/msnbc/Components/Sources/Art/APTRANS.gif[/IMG] LONDON - British Prime Minister Gordon Brown says he wants his Labour Party to govern in coalition with the Liberal Democrats — and he'll step down within months if that happens. Brown offered to quit in a bid to tempt the third-place Liberal Democrats to form an alliance with second-place Labour, not the Conservatives, who won the most seats in Thursday's election but not a majority. [I]Please check back for more developments on this breaking story.[/I][/QUOTE] [QUOTE=starpluck;21857368]Story has been updated Brown said he was asking the Labour Party to call a leadership election in which he would play no part and hoped the new leader would be in place in time for the autumn party conference. He also said he wanted his party to press ahead with "formal discussions" with the Liberal Democrats after the request from that party's leader Nick Clegg. In a statement in Downing Street, Brown said it was "sensible and in the national interest" to respond positively to the request. He said the Cabinet would meet soon and a "formal policy negotiation process" would be established.[I]Please check back for more developments on this breaking story.[/I][/QUOTE] Not much of a surprise, really... lubricates any talks with the libdems, won't it?
I'd have thought this would have been kind of expected.
Interesting. Let's hope that Nick gets his proportional representation, so the conservatives might never again gain power.
Go go David Miliband! [img]http://nickbaines.files.wordpress.com/2009/06/david-miliband1.jpg[/img]
[QUOTE=Beafman;21857009]Interesting. Let's hope that Nick gets his proportional representation, so the conservatives might never again gain power.[/QUOTE] Yep. Bout time we progressed.
[QUOTE=Beafman;21857009]Interesting. Let's hope that Nick gets his proportional representation, so the conservatives might never again gain power.[/QUOTE] No no, Proportional Representation is bad. It means weaker Governments that have to rely on the support of minority parties, leading to extremists getting more of a say in Parliament, which is basically how Hitler took over Weimar. Proportional Representation tends to cause hung parliaments.
Will they actually vote on who gets to replace him, or will someone just replace him like he replaced Blair?
[QUOTE=Splurgy;21857113]Go go David Miliband! [img]http://nickbaines.files.wordpress.com/2009/06/david-miliband1.jpg[/img][/QUOTE] oh god if you think david cameron's impression of tony blair was good, you should see miliband. he's basically blair with a skin transplant
lib dem and labour: a losers coalition according to nick robinson
[url]http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/37064821/ns/world_news-europe/[/url] [IMG]http://msnbcmedia1.msn.com/i/msnbc/Components/Sources/Art/APTRANS.gif[/IMG] LONDON - British Prime Minister Gordon Brown says he wants his Labour Party to govern in coalition with the Liberal Democrats — and he'll step down within months if that happens. Brown offered to quit in a bid to tempt the third-place Liberal Democrats to form an alliance with second-place Labour, not the Conservatives, who won the most seats in Thursday's election but not a majority. [I]Please check back for more developments on this breaking story.[/I]
[QUOTE=Acezorz;21857232]lib dem and labour: a losers coalition according to nick robinson[/QUOTE] Yet they got more votes combined than the conservatives, so technically they would have won if they were combined (but they arent) (the people on the BBC at the moment have some great logic).
So, have the conservatives officially won? I thought the labour party was more popular.
[QUOTE=Wakka;21857305]So, have the conservatives officially won? I thought the labour party was more popular.[/QUOTE] I meant he will resign as leader of the Labour party. [editline]04:32PM[/editline] [QUOTE=Jsm;21857249]Yet they got more votes combined than the conservatives, so technically they would have won if they were combined (but they arent) (the people on the BBC at the moment have some great logic).[/QUOTE] In a coalition or some form of an agreement, yes.
Here goes the rollercoaster
[QUOTE=Jsm;21857249]Yet they got more votes combined than the conservatives, so technically they would have won if they were combined (but they arent) (the people on the BBC at the moment have some great logic).[/QUOTE] I don't see what you mean. Tory and Lib Dems combined would not only have more votes but a majority. Labour wouldn't win with a Lib Dem coalition, they don't have enough seats between them.
The conservatives got the most seats, but are not in power. Democracy for the win.
[QUOTE=Wakka;21857305]So, have the conservatives officially won? I thought the labour party was more popular.[/QUOTE] Labour could still get in power but not with Gordon Brown as PM. Conservatives are more popular as far as votes go.
Story has been updated Brown said he was asking the Labour Party to call a leadership election in which he would play no part and hoped the new leader would be in place in time for the autumn party conference. He also said he wanted his party to press ahead with "formal discussions" with the Liberal Democrats after the request from that party's leader Nick Clegg. In a statement in Downing Street, Brown said it was "sensible and in the national interest" to respond positively to the request. He said the Cabinet would meet soon and a "formal policy negotiation process" would be established.[I]Please check back for more developments on this breaking story.[/I]
[QUOTE=codenamecueball;21857343]Here goes the rollercoaster[/QUOTE] Indeed. I liked Brown, but think its time for a change.
[QUOTE=petieng;21857345]I don't see what you mean. Tory and Lib Dems combined would not only have more votes but a majority. Labour wouldn't win with a Lib Dem coalition, they don't have enough seats between them.[/QUOTE] I (badly) quoted something said on the news, I meant to say that they would have more votes, not won.
Labour failed why are they still in power?
[QUOTE=starpluck;21857368]Story has been updated Brown said he was asking the Labour Party to call a leadership election in which he would play no part and hoped the new leader would be in place in time for the autumn party conference. He also said he wanted his party to press ahead with "formal discussions" with the Liberal Democrats after the request from that party's leader Nick Clegg. In a statement in Downing Street, Brown said it was "sensible and in the national interest" to respond positively to the request. He said the Cabinet would meet soon and a "formal policy negotiation process" would be established.[I]Please check back for more developments on this breaking story.[/I][/QUOTE] That was in his speech, but I couldn't get evidence. Thanks.
[QUOTE=Akayz;21857409]Labour failed why are they still in power?[/QUOTE] Because that is what the constitution says apparently. The sitting party gets to stay in power and get the first attempt at forming a government in the event of a hung parliament.
[QUOTE=Akayz;21857409]Labour failed why are they still in power?[/QUOTE] Nobody else has formed a government with a proper majority + both the incumbents and the party with the most seats haven't given up yet.
OK now there is a full article in BBC lol [url]http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/politics/election_2010/8672859.stm[/url]
It would be great if Nick gets proportional representation thanks to Cameron and then it causes Cameron to loose next year and Nick to smash him.
[QUOTE=Splurgy;21857150]No no, Proportional Representation is bad. It means weaker Governments that have to rely on the support of minority parties, leading to extremists getting more of a say in Parliament, which is basically how Hitler took over Weimar. Proportional Representation tends to cause hung parliaments.[/QUOTE] Oh yes, because Denmark is certainly a nazi country at the moment, right? Also it is correct that was how the nazi's got to power, however I would consider the british people very, VERY stupid if they would go ahead to vote in a nazi party, wouldn't you?
[QUOTE=HubmaN;21857432]Nobody else has formed a government with a proper majority + both the incumbents and the party with the most seats haven't given up yet.[/QUOTE] Fuck that, more problems will occur
[QUOTE=Splurgy;21857150]which is basically how Hitler took over Weimar. Proportional Representation tends to cause hung parliaments.[/QUOTE] :godwin:
[QUOTE=Splurgy;21857150]No no, Proportional Representation is bad. It means weaker Governments that have to rely on the support of minority parties, leading to extremists getting more of a say in Parliament, which is basically how Hitler took over Weimar. Proportional Representation tends to cause hung parliaments.[/QUOTE] and yet 80 countries worldwide, including most of europe use some form of PR
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.