European Tribune

An Open Letter to The UK Parliament

by SKapusniak
Sun Aug 20th, 2006 at 03:58:32 AM EST

Look, I know you're on your hols, but damnit, something has got to be done.

You know he's got to go, I know he's got to go. The whole country, indeed the whole freakin' world knows he's got to go.  There are probably alien tribes inhabiting nearby star systems banging their heads against walls because he hasn't gone yet. Everybody but Mr. Tony Blair himself knows he needs to be spending more time with his family.  A lot more time.  Starting yesterday.

So DO something already.

Please.

Yes, it's unfortunate that the byzantine internal wrangling of the Labour party doesn't seem to be cutting it on this one, but there it is.  Time to stage an intervention.


Sure, a no-confidence vote that actually succeeds is completely out of the question, I understand that. Too much of a nuclear option -- elections! scary! me backbencker! party broke! expensive! -- okay fine.  But can't you come up with something else?  I don't know, something like:

'Notwithstanding our utter confidence in Her Majesty's Government, honest guv, and in order to prevent the country's tarnished reputation being even further dragged through the mud, and to avoid us all waking tomorrow to find we've been signed up for whatever lunatic military or foreign policy scheme President Bush has cooked up over the barbecue this week, and so we don't keep having to disgust our foreign friends by confessing that no, Tony's not gone yet, and no we don't know when he's going; this House requires and expects that the Right Honourable Anthony Blair MP resign the office of Prime Minister (or First Lord of the Treasury, or whatever we're formally calling it these days) and hereby petitions Her Majesty the Queen to appoint some other qualified MP-like-dude-of-the-majority-party to the above office.'

...only more Parliamentary and possibly using actual real sentences.  Yes,  I realise that mostly likely means Gordon Brown as Prime Minister, and he makes you and all the pundits and a bunch of people out here in the country cry, but we'll all deal with it. I know we will.  We survived the Earl of Bute as PM.  We can weather Gordon for at least a while.  Some people even like him so I hear, and he does have the small slight advantage of never having been Home Secretary, so we may hope he doesn't bear the ancient curse of insane evil that afflicts all that have touched the eldritch dread of the Government Department that Drives Men Mad.

If you have to get Mr.Speaker liquored up to rule that sort of thing in order, then do so.  Or, if you can't stomach that one, think of something else. Anything else.  For crying out loud you've got a whole unwritten constitution and all that 'parliamentary sovereignty' stuff you keep boring on about whenever anything to do with Europe comes up, to work with.

I mean, you used to be good at this sort of thing, you even got rid of Kings you didn't like and everything.  Okay, I admit a Civil War or asking Holland to invade isn't exactly ideal -- though come to think of it, is their PM any good? Would they need additional naval transport to get to Westminster? -- but you got smoother at it. Go and suddenly discover that Tony's girlfriend is divorced and an American or something.  Or have him disastrously invade a country in the middle-east on dubious grounds and completely screw the whole thing up...

...Oh, right, sorry.

Just DO IT, and do it NOW, give him the ol' heave ho, before we all become so ashamed to admit our British citizenship that we start pretending to be Canadian.  You wouldn't like us when we're Canadian.  Don't make us pretend to be Canadian.

C'mon UK Parliament, you can do it!  Get yourself out there on that field and make our country proud!  We're all rooting for yer!

...

Yes, I even emailed it to The Times, sans linkage, just call me disgusted of Tunbridge Wells.  Completely the wrong length, format and style to ever be printed of course.

Login
. Make a new account
. Reset password

Display:


You can't be me, I'm taken
by Sven Triloqvist on Sun Aug 20th, 2006 at 04:35:29 AM EST
Why only to The Times?

Nothing is 'mere'. — Richard P. Feynman
by Migeru (migeru at eurotrib dot com) on Sun Aug 20th, 2006 at 05:16:36 AM EST
Because Dear Leader is a pawn of Murdoch.

Where's your motherf*%&ing flag pin?
by Drew J Jones (blahblahblah@blahblahblah.com) on Sun Aug 20th, 2006 at 11:07:44 AM EST
[ Parent ]
For some reason I suddenly had a picture of that scene in Deliverance where Ned Beatty is led away into the woods and is given a rather brutal demonstration of backwoods buggery. I imagined however that Tony had Ned's role and the backwoodsman was played energetically by Rupert Murdoch - buck naked apart from a leather hat with corks jiggling on strings around the brim.

I must be all the garlic last night - I'm still getting flashes...

You can't be me, I'm taken

by Sven Triloqvist on Sun Aug 20th, 2006 at 12:42:19 PM EST
[ Parent ]
I'm ashamed to admit that I've never seen Deliverance, but, yes, that sounds about right, if the papers are to be believed.

Where's your motherf*%&ing flag pin?
by Drew J Jones (blahblahblah@blahblahblah.com) on Sun Aug 20th, 2006 at 03:58:36 PM EST
[ Parent ]
It's not a movie I will revisit. I've always regarded Burt Reynolds as a comedian.

You can't be me, I'm taken
by Sven Triloqvist on Sun Aug 20th, 2006 at 04:02:17 PM EST
[ Parent ]
Yes, except that he's too often not trying to be a comedian.  I can't stand his work.

Where's your motherf*%&ing flag pin?
by Drew J Jones (blahblahblah@blahblahblah.com) on Sun Aug 20th, 2006 at 04:04:10 PM EST
[ Parent ]
I should have said unintentional comedian

You can't be me, I'm taken
by Sven Triloqvist on Sun Aug 20th, 2006 at 04:10:28 PM EST
[ Parent ]
You an' me both, but he won't go. He has Thatcher's delusions, he's going on and on and on and there is nothing the spineless Labour party will do to stop him.

It's beyond depressing.

keep to the Fen Causeway

by Helen (lareinagal at yahoo dot co dot uk) on Sun Aug 20th, 2006 at 01:36:26 PM EST
It is not automatic that there should be a dissolution of Parliament because a Prime Minister has lost the support of his party, although that party still has a majority. The Queen, I would suggest, has a discretion to send for another leader of the majority party in these circumstances and save her subjects an unnecessary general election.

The applicable constitutional conventions are a bit fuzzy because there have been so few similar cases and none exactly on point, since a relatively cohesive party system developed, in the last 200 years.

Sir Robert Peel is the only Prime Minister in this period who comprehensively blew up his party and lost the trust of the majority of his former supporters. As it was manifestly obvious following this that no Conservative was in a position to replace Peel, it was not difficult for the Queen to call on the Whig opposition leader, Lord John Russell, to form a Ministry.

The only other somewhat similar situations were in wartime and had more to do with coalition politics than a minority of his MPs becoming unhappy with the Prime Minister.

In 1916 the Conservatives and a minority of the Liberals combined (not in a vote in Parliament) to replace the Liberal leader H.H. Asquith with the other leading Liberal of the time David Lloyd George, at the head of a reconstructed Coalition Ministry. Asquith retained his party position, but was replaced as Prime Minister. (The Liberals were technically in a minority government before the wartime coalition, but the Labour and Irish Nationalist MPs provided them with a comfortable working majority over the Conservatives).

In 1940 Neville Chamberlain's normal majority was reduced by 70 in the vote on the Norwegian campaign. Although he still had a comfortable majority by peacetime rules, the defections plus the refusal of the opposition leaders to serve under him forced Chamberlain to resign, leading to Churchill becoming Prime Minister.

by Gary J on Sun Aug 20th, 2006 at 06:09:11 PM EST


Display:
Go to: [ European Tribune Homepage : Top of page : Top of comments ]