When pressed as to whether he would endorse Brown, Falconer says,
"Once he became the Prime Minister, or leader of the Party, of course he would have my backing."Why separate the two roles out like that in his answer? Could we be about to see Blair step down as leader but stay on as Prime Minister? There's nothing constitutionally to stop him doing so, and it would humiliate Brown no end.
Oh please let it happen. Please. It would be worth Blair staying around for a bit longer just to see Brown's face.
10 comments:
Yes please.
Or Falconer could issue a bizarre challenge.
now that would be worth watching
I have money on Blair surviving as PM until 2008...
Heh that would be fucking hilarious if Blair did that!
Must admit I was a bit busy that year getting hitched, but did anyone bet on Mrs T being pushed out in that unceremonious and undignified way?
Why does everyone think that Blair will get to go when he wants, even if it is hurting Labour's future electoral chances.
The tories did not win any votes being so ruthless but is Labour in danger of being punished for being so gutless?
I would laugh till 2008 if bliar did that.
Please see this from 22/12 when this kind of arrangement was predicted by little moi. Number four in the rebuttal of Luke Akehurst's Christmas List. If Gordon could be leader by March instead of say August and PM in mid May (again instead of August) I reckon he would be delighted and there would be quite a bounce, plus goodwill from Blair's many fans in the country.
Blair would be expelled from Labour if he did that and then Labour MPs would probably vote a noconfidence motion in him, the constitutional convention is vague but that should result in the Queen calling the leader of the Labour Party to form a government or a general election.
I've said this for a while. Blair clearly has no interest in the Labour Party anymore and I could see him carrying on as PM. Remember he only said he'd step down as leader of the Labour Party, not as PM!
Post a Comment