How come the Labour Party didn't have an election to make Gordon Brown leader?

Question

In any other situation, Tony Blair (remember him?) passing the baton to Gordon Brown would be seen as nepotism. By the way, could the Queen have refused to accept Gordy as Prime Minister?

Answer 1

The Labour Party members themselves had an 'election' for their new leader. The leader they chose - Brown, - automatically became Prime Minister as leader of the party in power

.

As Prime Ministers are NOT voted for to take the position by the population the general public gets no say in the matter. The population vote for MPs in a General Election, there is no 'prime minster' option on a voteing form, though they will have stood as an MP in a constituancy themselves.

To state again, as we do not specifically vote for whom is to become Prime Minister, if the Prime Minister steps down, etc, the party in power can replace him after an in-party leadership contest.

Labour are still in power and retain the right to choose their leader, whom incidentally also becomes' Prime Minister'.

I don't like it either, but we don't vote specially for a Prime Minister. In the case of Presidents, that happens, but not with Prime Ministers.

The Queen issue is a matter of simple history and culture. In reality, the Queen does not have the power to really refuse a PM - the same as when the PM wants to call an election & discolve parliment, protocol is to ask the reigining monarch, and they give their permission for it to happen. The royals doen't have much power anymore over anything. Even the Queens speach at state opening of parliment is written by the PM and their cronies. They all are apart from her Christmas one.

Answer 2

There was an attempt by Michael Meacher and by John McDonnell to run against Brown. There was a televised debate between the three, with Meacher doing very badly.

When it came to votes,  they needed to first get the support of 45 Labour MPs, before a vote would go to the wider party membership, and those affiliated to the Labour Party through their trade union. This rule was brought in by Neil Kinnock (I think) in the 1980s, to stop Tony Benn running against him.

McDonnell unfortunately failed to get enough support, even after Meacher pulled out. There was speculation that some Brownites joined the Meacher camp before pulling out themselves, in order to ensure that there would be no contest.

I think this proves that it is not feasible to build a left wing Labour Party any longer. The leadership do not listen to their members and attack public sector workers, asking them to take below inflation pay claims. We need to start afresh an build a new party, we don't just need a new Labour leader. Look at www.cnwp.org.uk - join the campaign for a new workers' party.

Answer 3

When has Democracy ever come into the thoughts of new labour?

Answer 4

Because democracy in England does not exist anymore. and for the same reason the people of Britain were never asked to vote in a refferendum on joining the EU it's all part of the big plan to give away our country.

Answer 5

They just posted an ad "Wanted complete b*****d" The queen could have refused him but I think it highly unlikely she would ever do so, mind you if they try to give the job to Paul Gadd it could be a problem, she might tell him his fortune.

Answer 6

Nobody else stood as candidate for Leader, so he was "elected" unopposed.

In theory the Queen has the ultimate power because it is her Government, so she could have refuse if she wished. However, it is now traditional for the reigning Monarch not to be involved in politics and I believe doesn't actually vote.

Answer 7

Well here's yet another person who hasn't a clue about the British Constitution. Please refer to other threads on this topic.

Answer 8

its a constitutional matter. English law

but i must say it is the fault of the english. they wull no stand up and fight back anymore when they are wronged by govt or any one, they just lay down or bend over, take it and say thank you sir may i have some more. Gordy only does what the EUski tells him too

as for the Queen, she seems to be just as cow'd by westminster and the EUski ,as is the rest of the nation  cow'd so i no longer respect the queen or the royal family

Answer 9

They did, but only Tony Blair was allowed to vote.

Answer 10

Because Gordon Brown built up a power block of like minded political cretins who thought they would be on the band waggon regarding positions in the cabinet!

The point is!Labour thought that he was better than he has turned out to be!

The way I understand the British Constitution!The Queen!Like you or I is stuck with this political nonentity!

Answer 11

No-one obtained enough votes to challenge him.  Simple.

Answer 12

WE LIVE UNDER A ONE PARTY DICTATORSHIP, DEMOCRACY IS A FARSE AND NO ONE STANDS AGAINST IT

Answer 13

There was scope for an election, but in the event, nobody decided to stand against Brown.  Seeing as you can't have an election without more than one candidate, Brown was appointed Leader (and ergo Prime Minister) by default.

Constitutionally, the Queen could not have refused Brown as PM, as he is the legitimate Leader of the largest faction in the House of Commons.  Only if he purported to seriously violate constitutional precedent and rule of law would she have grounds to dismiss him.