Il Regno Unito non dovrebbe continuare a cambiare primo ministro, avverte John Major
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cgepy0xw1nzo
di Brilliant_Version344
Tag
Austria
Belgio
Belgium
Bulgaria
Cechia
Croatia
Croazia
Czech
Czechia
Czech Republic
Danimarca
Denmark
Estonia
Europa
Europe
France
Francia
Germania
Germany
Grecia
Greece
Hungary
Ireland
Irlanda
Polonia
Polska
Portogallo
Portugal
Regno Unito
Repubblica Ceca
Repubblica di Turchia
Romania
Serbia
Slovacchia
Slovakia
Slovenia
Svezia
Sweden
Turchia
Turkey
Ucraina
Ucraino
Ukraine
Ungheria
United Kingdom
31 commenti
For sure, we should look to emulate Australia instead.
Maybe they should stop making hurendous decisions that would help
EDIT: Jesus these downvotes. BUt wHat AbOUt the GOod policies hE dOne. I’m not saying he hasn’t pushed good policies but all that is morally overidden by hiring mandelson. It’s like saying oh but he helped an old lady cross the road after stabbing an innocent person.
He’d rather they had stuck with him. Fuck me, but it says something about the modern Tory Party that John Major is the sanest of their former leaders still knocking around.
I totally agree. We need to have more patience and less cynicism and false scapegoats. There is only one leader who makes a realistic PM now and that is the way it is, and we need more stability to get our reputation back.
No need to change them if they do a good job. That however, is not the case.
Look at the disaster of the tories term in power. We went from Cameron to May, to Boris to (very briefly) Liz and then Rishi.
All of them were awful.
Isn’t he the guy who is famous for forcing a change in Prime minister?
Yeh… but we keep getting bad PMs. And Keir Starmer hasn’t improved things.
Honestly he is right – If the UK keeps changing its leaders and prime minister, it just ends up bringing more uncertaincy and stability in the country. People will be unhappy, riots will start and the UK will be thrown into chaos.
It will be a lawless state, because this country keeps swapping and replacing its PM.
They should go find the most regular joe at a pub and put him in as prime minister. Doubly so if he doesn’t want the job.
It would be the least corrupt leader UK’s had since WW2.
Never thought I’d agree with Major in my lifetime but ……… it’s happened (and I detest him, which says it all!).
While I agree in principle there is an issue of accountability as well. No matter which way you look at it Starmer is struggling with scandals of his own making and ruling a party that was never united behind him. He lacks leadership, which is not the same as taking decisive action or making decisions on a whim. He has shown hypocrisy and poor judgment. Most importantly he has delivered a mostly incompetent government because he stands for very little and thus gives no direction, preferring to defer to the whims of the various factions in the party.
Ultimately, he is failing and has done so quickly. I would rather there weren’t endless changes in government. In fact, I have always felt that the PM should be elected directly and serve a longer term than Parliament to reduce the inherent short-termism of our democratic system. Yet, Starmer is not suitable to stay. At the same time, there isn’t any other option that will lead to the coherent, strong and clear leadership the country needs. Which is a symptom of wider problems in our democracy. The party structure, the growing gap between the public need and political opportunity, the electorate’s demand for instant solutions driven by a lack of interest in their problems for so long from all sides, and so on.
So, no we shouldn’t keep changing PM. At the same time though should we keep one who is mired in scandal, shows poor judgment at appointments of importance, is given to blatant hypocrisy (not that the rest of parliament is any better), and is failing to keep his cabinet operating in a coherent and joined up manner?
Get Rupert Lowe in as pm then we’ll talk about not changing pms!
I dunno, I think the forcing through the appointment of a man who had failed vetting, been sacked twice previously for misconduct, had committed treason & was a close friend of the most notorious paedophile ring leader in modern world history is as good a reason as you can get to declare someone unsuitable for the job. Not to mention the completely brazen lying to the public and constant changes in what he does vs what he said he would do to get elected. Stability only is worth it if the people in charge act in a stable way, we shouldn’t accept either incompetence or serial lying in our leadership – keeping corrupt or inept leadership does not make us look stable on the world stage.
Major , while largely a figure of fun during his tenure, remains the last Tory PM to fully win an election and serve his full term in office.
But they have all been shit! We havent had a decent PM in 75 years.
I don’t disagree at all but that sentiment mostly just comes from people who voted for Keir Starmer (and John Major apparently) so of course they’ll want to stick now they got someone they’re happy with.
Completely agree with him, it’s bad for stability and makes people have unrealistic expectations about what someone can do in a short period of time. It’s not helped by the right wing press encouraging it because they make money off chaos and headlines.
Boris should never have been let near number 10. Liz was just insanity (makes you wonder what America will do after Trump). Rishi likewise, under normal conditions would never have gotten near number 10.
But we do need stability. And leaders with integrity. Keir is principled and doing a good job with a shit hand. It’s obvious that people are out to get him, and from all sides. He’s pissed off big tech, America, Russia, by standing up to them and not letting UK be bullied. Pretty much doing what is in our best interests and not folding or selling us out.
Perhaps if the Conservative Party had actually elected competent MPs to be their party leader they wouldn’t get changed so quickly
We arent changing Starmer, the Labour MP’s will, just after the elections
Though during that process the Labour party may collapse and we get a general election
We wouldnt need to if we had a decent prime minister, and it wouldnt be a problem if we cultivated a crop of decent potential candidates for prime minister.
Major and Starmer are two sides of the same coin—both EU-obsessed and unable to govern effectively. Both are tediously uninspiring figures. It’s unsurprising Major sympathises with Starmer; further evidence of the “uni party.” Vote however you want; nothing changes.
Agreed and not just a potential issue with Starmer … Since WW2:
– Macmillan (Tory) suceeded Eden with no public mandate although later won a general election,
– Douglas-Home (Tory) suceeded Macmillan with no public mandate,
– Callaghan (Labour) suceeded Wilson with no public mandate,
– Major (Tory) suceeded Tratcher with no public mandate although later won a general election,
– Brown (Labour) suceeded Blair with no public mandate,
– May (Tory) suceeded Cameron with no public mandate although later won a general election,
– Johnson (Tory) suceeded May with no public mandate although later won a general election,
– Truss (Tory) suceeded Johnson with no public mandate,
– Sunak (Tory) succeeded Truss with no public mandate.
I does seem to be something the Tories are rather more happy about than Labour who are less inclined to change PMs with no public mandate.
But how to change the current system? Even having MPs in the Commons chose a PM, although more democratic, probably wouldn’t make any difference …?
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_prime_ministers_of_the_United_Kingdom#Prime_ministers](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_prime_ministers_of_the_United_Kingdom#Prime_ministers)
On this occasion he is actually right, the country constantly changing PM’s is damaging to our credibility and reputation.
Whilst stability is a good thing on one hand, the fixed term parliaments approach means you’re always stuck with the same government for the longest period possible. That also makes it less risky for a party to change PM and the public likely to support it.
All of this recent stuff just feels so irrelevant and it is really quite boring to hear journalists go on about it. It has made the Newsagents podcast almost unlistenable for the last 4 or 5 episodes
So let’s keep starmer than the guy has no back bone he’s a fucking darlick bell end
I agree.
Look, if you hate Starmer, vote for someone else next election. What will changing him fix? We will get another Labour PM thst probably will just do something else thst people don’t like and pressure into resigning.
I didn’t like any of the PMs we got in the time the Conservatives were in power (I have never like any PM at all but what’s new) but changing Theresa May with Boris then with Truss then Sunak…. Were we any better off? No. It didn’t help anything, we just got worse and worse people in power and we all saw how incompetent the party was.
People calling for him to resign need to ask what they actually want. Do they think things will be better for them? Because probably not.
I agree, the UK is starting to look like a football club
It’s not ‘the U.K.’. It is political parties that need to stop thinking that a leader is ‘temporary’. Each major political party seems to think that the leadership is a prize to be coveted and a commodity to be traded. Time and time again the public has punished parties that behave like the public’s vote at a general election is transferable to a new leader. It isn’t.
Reduced intention spans have a correlation with making decisions based on the short term.
Wouldn’t be surprised if that’s phones/tiktok etc affecting people’s voting patterns