Following the news that Gordon Brown has decided not to hold a general election this autumn, Liberal Democrat leader Ming Campbell spoke live to BBC News 24. He said:
“There’s no doubt people will see this as a loss of nerve on the part of the prime minister.
“It follows the mishandled trip to Iraq which upset many people, including the announcement on troop numbers which turned out not to be all it seemed.
“His predecessor as Prime Minister promised to serve a full term and didn’t. Gordon Brown should have called an election when he took office.”
Commenting on the way the news that there will not be an election has emerged, Ming said:
“Labour is yet again spinning even with this announcement. The Prime Minister is not willing to face the barrage of questions the public have the right to expect him to face over the date of the next general election.
“The Prime Minister has belatedly put an end to the charade of last few weeks.
“He could have prevented needless speculation by making this announcement long before now.
“Gordon Brown has been acting in the interests of the Labour Party and not in the interests of the country.”
Ming again criticised a system which allows the Prime Minister to choose the date of the general election, firing the starting gun for a race in which he’s running. He told the BBC:
“The only way in which to get certainty in these matters is to have fixed term parliaments, as they do in Scotland.
“The prime minister of the day will always be inclined to put the interests of his party ahead of the interests of the country. That is not acceptable.”
Pingback: General election news: what the Lib Dem bloggers say | Liberal Democrat Voice
Please note my reply to The Sun Newspaper/Jon Gaunt 09/10/2007
Always of great interest, often humorous, but deadly serious your column is not only informative, but also makes us think.
Two small quotes are well worth the whole paper.
– One: UKIP immigration policy, I have emailed my letter previously.
– Two: The Liberal Democrats election proposal:
For once Ming Campbell has a long awaited very logical point: General Elections should definitively be set on fixed terms of office. A five years term would be excellent.
France is a good example, among others, where the President is elected for 5 years, General Election concurrent now with the National Assembly’s (Parliament). (Five years is also the legislature’s mandate, as so the two terms are to run concurrently. A unique General Election theoretically gets creditable voters’ turnover, keeping public disruption to a minimum, not neglecting the obvious reduced overall cost).
An imperative point should be that the Prime Minister elected should not be able to pass on his cap without having completed his or her mandate to the full: Brown is a perfect illustration.
If the PM has to move on to spend time with his family (or to pursue his utopic boyish dream of being the Mick Jagger for Europe) a General Election should be called at once.
Imagine PM Cameron passing the baton to Zac Goldsmith: To periphrase a classic front-page issue of The Sun, “Would the last person living the Country turn the lights offâ€
Sadly (for them) this proposal is not enough to rend the Lib. Dem. “electableâ€, thanks to their kamikaze Tax policies.
Tuesday 9th October 2007
Louis de Monreand