advertisement


A List of Tories Promising to resign when Johnson gets appointed

Alan Duncan is looking typically smug about his resignation.

methode-times-prodmigration-web-bin-5694bc9f-b7fa-3e67-b960-48ef652bc21c.jpg
 
Alan Duncan is looking typically smug about his resignation.

methode-times-prodmigration-web-bin-5694bc9f-b7fa-3e67-b960-48ef652bc21c.jpg
Duncan is incredibly pompous and I know it’s hard to believe but even slower on his feet than Johnson. It’s as though the rise of Johnson has been the making of Duncan, purely as Johnson’s detractor rather than for any contribution to government.
 
In fairness Alan Duncan's resignation letter starts "It is customary for all Ministers to stand down on the departure of a Prime Minister..."

So those rats leaving the sinking ship before Johnson is at the helm are actually doing the correct and honourable thing by resigning from their government position. Resigning before you are sacked/replaced anyway might be more accurate, however.

Whether enough will leave the Party to officially sit in opposition as a protest against No-Deal is another matter entirely, but certainly true that Johnson/Hunt need the DUP signed up to their cause and the full complement of his own to command a majority that her Maj will agree to. If she turns him down I might re-think my republicanism.

Its just another twist in the laughable mess that the Tory party has created in eating its own p**is by pursuing Brexit without a plan and you'd think that those banging on about this for ~40years might have cemented a cogent plan and endgame before setting out their referendum position.
 
You never know Ian Paisley Jr - turns out there’s more than one foreign power he’s been taking bungs from to shill for them in Westminster. I’m sure the security services have enough on some of them to put them away for 10 years.
 
It seems to me, that both the Tories and Labour need to review the way they choose a leader of their respective parties.
 
I have no problem with the membership choosing who should be leader.
But if that leads directly to an unelected PM the law should change.
So, ok if in opposition, if in govt a general election should be mandatory.
 
I have no problem with the membership choosing who should be leader.
But if that leads directly to an unelected PM the law should change.
So, ok if in opposition, if in govt a general election should be mandatory.

That's just daft. Should there be a General Election if a PM dies or has to retire through ill-health and has to be replaced, even if an election had been held earlier that year?
 
That's just daft. Should there be a General Election if a PM dies or has to retire through ill-health and has to be replaced, even if an election had been held earlier that year?

Perhaps there should be an official deputy PM so that the electorate would know they were going to get in the case of the PM being offed or otherwise unable to continue - a bit like the US system.
 
That's just daft. Should there be a General Election if a PM dies or has to retire through ill-health and has to be replaced, even if an election had been held earlier that year?
Oddly, it isn’t daft. The answer is Yes.
 
That's just daft. Should there be a General Election if a PM dies or has to retire through ill-health and has to be replaced, even if an election had been held earlier that year?
The question, I think, is whether the Government is effectively changed by a change in the PM. So, changes in policy from what was voted for in the last PM's manifesto, or a material change in emphasis or priority of the manifesto positions.

By and large, each leader wants and expects to make their mark, so their position on manifesto matters will differ from their predecessor's, which by implication means the manifesto that got them elected is not going to be the manifesto that gets enacted. So, yes, a new GE please.
 


advertisement


Back
Top