Concentrating executive power in the hands of the prime minister has the enormous drawback of requiring a greater concentration on an individual than modern political and historical analytic best practice might prefer. It's also rather dull, particularly when the inappropriate object is Gordon Brown.
This idiot savant, impervious among his spreadsheets and statistics, his Party deals and rule-governed micro managing, presents further and personalised difficulties in the resistance to his removal than do most prime ministers who often prefer a little longer in office. In Brown's case we have lost half the leverage to apply to his removal - there is nowhere for him to go.
International institutions that might have been pressed into service have turned him down already - the World Bank specifically, others by various exclusions that in Brown's case would be vigorously applied: the IMF - he's not American; the European Union - he's kept the UK out of the euro and been grossly ill-mannered and hectoring to more EU power brokers than he (or regrettably the United Kingdom) can afford; the financial world - draw a veil over their reaction to the introduction of the ultimately unclubbable into their company; the United Nations - disrespecting the President of the United States who, regardless of party is identified with the American people by the American people, is not a parole-able offence; and so the no noes go on.
It's so much harder to winkle them out without a pin of enticement.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Posts
6 comments:
Excellent !
... going barefoot on us, HG?
It's all coming to bits. It's coming to bits so badly it's difficult to point at everything that's falling off before it's gone.
A case could be made now, I suspect, for challenging the validity of any ratification of any important treaty during this shambles.
A case could be made ...
now that I like
back to the thread: a Murtlock - or a Rasputin or a Carole Caplin - could lead him a merry dance in these circumstances
It seems a shame that Brown's voters do not enjoy the American privilege of "recalling" their elected representative, as recently happened somewhere in the US. Sorry I forget the details (was it in California?) but the "recallee" was removed from office by the process.
O/T: Just wondering whether the changing of the guard at City Hall will make any difference to the planned desecration of Bloomsbury for the Olympian hangers-on?
Next stake (sharpened and ready) -holders is 19 May, Nomad, for Bloomsbury.
There have been announcements that there are to be announcements of major constitutional 'reforms' so perhaps 'recall' might be among them.
This junta is in no position to make any further constitutional changes is it? What they have done already is performing like the mills of God - and greatly to their disadvantage, as well as to England's.
Post a Comment