Labour vote share in the 15 opinion polls before Farage announced he was leading & standing for RefUK:
44.53%
In the 15 opinion polls since then:
43.4%
Net drop in Labour vote share: 1.1%
Personally I would compare like-with-like. It's not good aggregating across different methodologies because you might end up with selection bias influencing the result.
True but 15 polls is a large sample size?
As has been said before, if don't knows switch to Reform on the back of Farage's announcement Labour's % will go down... even if not a single voter abandons them.
Well, there is because something can be saved from that.
But I'm now in a place where I wonder just how much more damage Sunak can do in the next 4 weeks.
He will certainly make more mistakes. I'd far rather take the risk of David Cameron playing nightwatchman now, to be honest.
Cameron can take over the campaign. He can, through some form of internal shenanigans, become leader of the Conservative Party. I have huge doubts as to whether he can become PM though, huge doubts. I don’t see how it works. So you’re running a campaign with no idea who will be PM if you win. How does that work unless you just admit defeat and say you want to be a strong opposition? I don’t get it.
Well, constitutionally there's nothing stopping a PM being from the Lords.
No, but why would the King appoint a new PM in the middle of a GE campaign just because the Tories changed their leader? The cleanest way to mange is that Sunak stays PM and hands over to the election winner.
Well, there is because something can be saved from that.
But I'm now in a place where I wonder just how much more damage Sunak can do in the next 4 weeks.
He will certainly make more mistakes. I'd far rather take the risk of David Cameron playing nightwatchman now, to be honest.
Cameron can take over the campaign. He can, through some form of internal shenanigans, become leader of the Conservative Party. I have huge doubts as to whether he can become PM though, huge doubts. I don’t see how it works. So you’re running a campaign with no idea who will be PM if you win. How does that work unless you just admit defeat and say you want to be a strong opposition? I don’t get it.
Well, constitutionally there's nothing stopping a PM being from the Lords.
Understood. But what constitutional principle requires the King to appoint Cameron as opposed to, say, Angela Smith, Baroness Smith of Basildon, who is the leader of the Labour Party in the Lords? There’s nothing binding him to the choice of Cameron as no one has a Commons majority.
Because the rest of his provisional government and his ministers are Conservative ones - there can't not be a government at any time - and a Labour PM couldn't command them or their confidence for the intervening weeks.
You do all realise, don’t you, that in 1997 the Labour leads were almost comparable to 2024 at the same stage? The difference was a few more in the mid teens. They didn’t narrow until two weeks out and then, in the real deal, it wound up at 12.5%
Are you sure we’re not all overdoing this? That in fact this will be closer to the 1997 result? Corollary, the RefUK ‘surge’ is about as real as the YouthQuake?
Well, there is because something can be saved from that.
But I'm now in a place where I wonder just how much more damage Sunak can do in the next 4 weeks.
He will certainly make more mistakes. I'd far rather take the risk of David Cameron playing nightwatchman now, to be honest.
Cameron can take over the campaign. He can, through some form of internal shenanigans, become leader of the Conservative Party. I have huge doubts as to whether he can become PM though, huge doubts. I don’t see how it works. So you’re running a campaign with no idea who will be PM if you win. How does that work unless you just admit defeat and say you want to be a strong opposition? I don’t get it.
Well, constitutionally there's nothing stopping a PM being from the Lords.
Understood. But what constitutional principle requires the King to appoint Cameron as opposed to, say, Angela Smith, Baroness Smith of Basildon, who is the leader of the Labour Party in the Lords? There’s nothing binding him to the choice of Cameron as no one has a Commons majority.
The King would refuse the resignation initially as nobody can demonstrate the confidence of the House of his subjects representatives whilst it does not sit, remind Sunak of his responsibility to the nation. If Sunak insisted he'd probably only be able to appoint from within the government and on a caretaker basis. Or perhaps would exercise the reserved powers personally with the help of the Privy Council pending the election.
Well, there is because something can be saved from that.
But I'm now in a place where I wonder just how much more damage Sunak can do in the next 4 weeks.
He will certainly make more mistakes. I'd far rather take the risk of David Cameron playing nightwatchman now, to be honest.
Cameron can take over the campaign. He can, through some form of internal shenanigans, become leader of the Conservative Party. I have huge doubts as to whether he can become PM though, huge doubts. I don’t see how it works. So you’re running a campaign with no idea who will be PM if you win. How does that work unless you just admit defeat and say you want to be a strong opposition? I don’t get it.
He can't become leader of the party.
Conservative Party Constitution, part iii section 10:
There shall be a Leader of the Party (referred to in this Constitution as “the Leader”) drawn from those elected to the House of Commons
And because Lord Cameron cannot become leader of the Conservative Party, he cannot be Prime Minister.
Oliver Dowden is deputy PM so if Rishi were to fall under a bus, it would probably be he who takes over.
It won’t happen, if course, but if the Tory Party wanted Cameron it could have him.
Sunak stays PM until election day but otherwise it’s hard to pick a new PM absent Parliament. Cameron leads the campaign, and the party, that rule being changed easily (clubs make their own rules). If a miracle then happens c Cameron becomes PM from the Lords, but presumably stands in a swiftly vacated safe seat.
What's the mechanism for renouncing a life peerage? Is there one?
Same as the other route, I think.
Hmmmm.
The Institute for Government doesn't agree.
Peerages are held until a person’s death, but the House of Lords Reform Act 2014 allows peers to resign as sitting members. To do this, they must give written notice to the clerk of the parliaments – the most senior impartial official in the Lords. Resignations cannot be rescinded. Giving up membership of the House of Lords is separate from giving up a peerage, however. Life peerages cannot be relinquished.
More than MOE fall for Labour tho. What if they dip below 40? This is getting SLIGHTLY interesting
The last 5 Opiniums have been:
45% 41% 43% 40% 41%
Tonight’s 42% is all part of MOE
All polls are showing that Reform - or someone - has dented Labour’s VI. Of course their lead is so enormous it doesn’t matter - yet
But nonetheless cause for modest concern, I’d say. If it continues eroding at this rate Labour could end up in the mid 30s
Ah the Leondamus sees and speaks. The Great Predictor who doesn’t even know the difference between Norway and Denmark.
Finally, some respect. For i am He. The LEONDAMUS. And verily I say: there floweth a river in Kyiv, and it is mighty, e’en though thou never heardst of it, for some reasoneth, honestly, what are thee like, call thyself a travel scribe
Trying to top Rogerdamus the shame... the shame...
There is not a single voter in the country who needs a journalist to tell them this. There is not a single poster or lurker on PB who needed you to tell us this, so why did you post it?
What do we think was the strategy? All built around the 2K Lie? Which Penny persisted with to ridicule and disbelief.
Once something like that falls apart so quickly, so cuts through not as a Labour tax rise but as a lie, each mention, billboard and advert is actually hurting the Conservative vote.
Calling a Snappy Lec without a strong campaign ready, without a strong strategy ready, is this the nub of what’s gone wrong - to the disbelief of Tory members and MPs?
Why does anyone post any links on here? A: to share news, opinion, information, gossip, jokes...
I cannot imagine why you are so sore about Battery posting this?
Because Moon is annoyed their "actually the Tories are doing great" rubbish has failed.
She spent months pretending to be Labour, then Lib Dem, then she had a Damascene conversion to being a Tory and then spent the last two weeks telling us Rishi is actually good and the public will produce a Tory victory.
Her judgement is a joke and she's been found out. That's why she's going off on one.
“She spent months pretending to be Labour, then Lib Dem”
Dear Horse Bat. Stop lying about my voting record. This ain’t a game. This is serious.
I’ve never said I’ve voted Labour. I said I have voted Libdem, and for a man with a bin on his head. All that we can put down to rebellious youthfulness. I’ve only ever posted that I will never in my life vote Labour.
It’s perfectly okay for dissatisfied Tories to vote Lib Dem, because Lib Dem’s are very much centre right. Con, Ref, Libdem are right of centre parties. All the left agree on is the individual and the state, the parties of the right understand it’s families and neighbourhoods, and protecting our shared cultural inheritances that is the foundation of society, and not the state.
The right cuts down Labours bulbous state and ruinous state spending, and by doing so boosts families, household incomes, aspiration, and individual freedom.
Conservatism exists not to stop progress, nor keep everything the same, but in acknowledgement natures way is everything forever changes, and we need to conserve what is of value and importance. You build a wall to keep the wild things out. Within the wall you build a path to get you from A to B safely in the dark or inclement weather. Where your way leads across the stream, you build a bridge. If you now do nothing to conserve the path and the wall and the bridge, nature will take them from you. It will change your world and take everything you value from you. Those things you want your children to learn in the right way, whilst on your knee? they will learn it first elsewhere, in the wrong way. The world always needs Conservative thinking and action. If we don’t get Conservatives back in government soon, the country will fall apart.
None of this is game playing, Horse Bat, like you refer to it with your child like level of political understanding.
"ChatGPT, write some drivel about politics"
Not just you customary ungentlemanly rudeness stands out, but your complete inability to discuss the real politics behind all this, makes it oh so clear you don’t actually understand the philosophical make up of British Politics, do you?
Labours tax on our junk food meals and take away deliveries is an absolute disgrace, by the way. Do you defend Labours tax on our whoppers, Horse Bat? Or can you at least condemn the worst Labour tax grab of them all?
I can see why the Tories are against whoppers being taxed to be fair.
It’s a Wedge issue… hands off our our lightly spiced wedgies!
We won’t pay the burger tax, we won’t pay the burger tax. Ala la laa
Er. Wasn't the Junk Food Tax / Reformulation Tax part of the National Food Strategy that was commission by... er, Michael Gove in 2019?
Yes, Truss dumped it and Sunak's since turned it into a culture war talking point. And now it's just another example of the Tory 2024 election campaign rubbishing everything they were elected on in 2019. I'm not sure it's going to end very well for them...
We are over taxed as it is, last thing we need is Labours hated Pizza Tax.
VAT on to Eat out, under Labour.
(stop sniggering at the back, PB)
But the Reformulation Tax was designed to be broadly revenue neutral - the idea was to encourage fast food restaurants to change their recipes to reduce sugar and salt content where possible.
It wasn't designed to raise money, although it would very probably have reduced NHS costs in the long term.
The NFS recommendations are worth a read - it's unfortunate that they got caught up in the Tory infighting. I suppose you can count it as another of those Gove "great idea, but no follow through" episodes.
There's an interesting article in Science's answer to the Beano this week about adding Potassium to salt to fix the hypertension problem
Isn't that what Lo-Salt and the like have been doing forever - a 50/50 mix of KCl and NaCl?
Yes. But I think the idea is to legislate that all salt has to be Potassium/Sodium. Like adding iodine fixed the thyroid/goitre problem.
Ah, fair enough. Hard to see how it would be introduced without causing a vast rumpus - look at how many recipes specify Kosher salt to avoid the iodine, even though we don't have iodised salt in the UK.
I could see people switching to dishwasher salt in order to avoid the woke potassium!
More significantly it is dangerous to those with renal impairment, though they probably shouldn't be adding salt anyway. Similarly those on ACE inhibitors unless carefully discussed with their doctor.
A Whitehall source said Cameron was “apoplectic” about Sunak’s decision but, when asked why he had not “picked Sunak up by his lapels”, he said: “There is only so much I can do.”
There was also fury at Buckingham Palace, where courtiers pointed out that the King, who is being treated for cancer, was advised not to travel but was determined to do so, despite being in pain. Advertisement
While the Tories are this weekend engaged in a circular firing squad to identify who to blame, the truth is, as one insider put it, everyone’s hands are covered in blood. The issue of what to do was debated in the three-day look-ahead meeting in Conservative Campaign Headquarters (CCHQ) at 1pm on Monday at which all Sunak’s key aides were present, including Isaac Levido, his campaign director, Liam Booth-Smith, the Downing Street chief of staff, and James Forsyth, his political secretary.
A Whitehall source said Cameron was “apoplectic” about Sunak’s decision but, when asked why he had not “picked Sunak up by his lapels”, he said: “There is only so much I can do.”
There was also fury at Buckingham Palace, where courtiers pointed out that the King, who is being treated for cancer, was advised not to travel but was determined to do so, despite being in pain. Advertisement
While the Tories are this weekend engaged in a circular firing squad to identify who to blame, the truth is, as one insider put it, everyone’s hands are covered in blood. The issue of what to do was debated in the three-day look-ahead meeting in Conservative Campaign Headquarters (CCHQ) at 1pm on Monday at which all Sunak’s key aides were present, including Isaac Levido, his campaign director, Liam Booth-Smith, the Downing Street chief of staff, and James Forsyth, his political secretary.
The fact that the King did what was required of him, when he actually had a reasonable excuse to leave it to the Prince of Wales, is not much remarked upon but only serves to make cut-and-run Rishi look even worse.
Not so much a matter of what were they thinking, but were they actually thinking at all?
Well, there is because something can be saved from that.
But I'm now in a place where I wonder just how much more damage Sunak can do in the next 4 weeks.
He will certainly make more mistakes. I'd far rather take the risk of David Cameron playing nightwatchman now, to be honest.
Cameron can take over the campaign. He can, through some form of internal shenanigans, become leader of the Conservative Party. I have huge doubts as to whether he can become PM though, huge doubts. I don’t see how it works. So you’re running a campaign with no idea who will be PM if you win. How does that work unless you just admit defeat and say you want to be a strong opposition? I don’t get it.
He can't become leader of the party.
Conservative Party Constitution, part iii section 10:
There shall be a Leader of the Party (referred to in this Constitution as “the Leader”) drawn from those elected to the House of Commons
And because Lord Cameron cannot become leader of the Conservative Party, he cannot be Prime Minister.
Oliver Dowden is deputy PM so if Rishi were to fall under a bus, it would probably be he who takes over.
It won’t happen, if course, but if the Tory Party wanted Cameron it could have him.
Sunak stays PM until election day but otherwise it’s hard to pick a new PM absent Parliament. Cameron leads the campaign, and the party, that rule being changed easily (clubs make their own rules). If a miracle then happens c Cameron becomes PM from the Lords, but presumably stands in a swiftly vacated safe seat.
What's the mechanism for renouncing a life peerage? Is there one?
Same as the other route, I think.
Hmmmm.
The Institute for Government doesn't agree.
Peerages are held until a person’s death, but the House of Lords Reform Act 2014 allows peers to resign as sitting members. To do this, they must give written notice to the clerk of the parliaments – the most senior impartial official in the Lords. Resignations cannot be rescinded. Giving up membership of the House of Lords is separate from giving up a peerage, however. Life peerages cannot be relinquished.
Not sure whether that would make a life peer eligible for the Commons?
Life peers cannot renounce their peerages but they can renounce their right to sit in the House of Lords, and then stand for election to the Commons. But the deadline was yesterday so he's missed it.
Well, there is because something can be saved from that.
But I'm now in a place where I wonder just how much more damage Sunak can do in the next 4 weeks.
He will certainly make more mistakes. I'd far rather take the risk of David Cameron playing nightwatchman now, to be honest.
Cameron can take over the campaign. He can, through some form of internal shenanigans, become leader of the Conservative Party. I have huge doubts as to whether he can become PM though, huge doubts. I don’t see how it works. So you’re running a campaign with no idea who will be PM if you win. How does that work unless you just admit defeat and say you want to be a strong opposition? I don’t get it.
Well, constitutionally there's nothing stopping a PM being from the Lords.
Understood. But what constitutional principle requires the King to appoint Cameron as opposed to, say, Angela Smith, Baroness Smith of Basildon, who is the leader of the Labour Party in the Lords? There’s nothing binding him to the choice of Cameron as no one has a Commons majority.
The King would refuse the resignation initially as nobody can demonstrate the confidence of the House of his subjects representatives whilst it does not sit, remind Sunak of his responsibility to the nation. If Sunak insisted he'd probably only be able to appoint from within the government and on a caretaker basis. Or perhaps would exercise the reserved powers personally with the help of the Privy Council pending the election.
In absolute extremis, rather than your last option I reckon you’d pick a non-political but qualified Lord rather than him do it. Gus O’Donnell say. Everyone would believe he’d be a caretaker only, so he’d command the notional parliament until Starmer kissed hands, and it keeps the King clean.
Labour vote share in the 15 opinion polls before Farage announced he was leading & standing for RefUK:
44.53%
In the 15 opinion polls since then:
43.4%
Net drop in Labour vote share: 1.1%
Personally I would compare like-with-like. It's not good aggregating across different methodologies because you might end up with selection bias influencing the result.
True but 15 polls is a large sample size?
As has been said before, if don't knows switch to Reform on the back of Farage's announcement Labour's % will go down... even if not a single voter abandons them.
True. But so much battleground is Tory v Labour, if Don’t Knows break Ref instead of Tory, both % down, gap the same.
The important thing is Tory share = votes. Low share means low votes means bloody ‘ell
You do all realise, don’t you, that in 1997 the Labour leads were almost comparable to this time at this stage? The difference was a few more in the mid teens. They didn’t narrow until two weeks out and then, in the real deal, it wound up at 12.5%
Are you sure we’re not all overdoing this? That in fact this will be closer to the 1997 result? Corollary, the RefUK ‘surge’ is about as real as the YouthQuake?
We are overdoing it. All this talk of zero seats for the Tories is madness. Total madness. Even the idea of the Tories slipping into third is fun as a joke but it's not going to happen.
Which is why earlier today and yesterday (when panic was at a peak) was a great time to buy.
The other caution I would have on these two most recent polls is that most ( or in fact maybe all ? ) the fieldwork seems to have been done before yesterday PM, and earlier today, when the D-day disaster really led the news.
Still, maybe we've been slightly overstating how much Reform are rising, nonetheless.
Well we have had four polls covering the actual leaving early and yesterday when the row really blew up and nothing 'obvious' showing up yet. More in Common did an extra few hundred responses to capture yesterday after the apology and Luke Tryl suggested whilst not enough data to be sure, Labour were maybe a bit further ahead on Fridays responses. Other pollsters seem to think it will have a profound effect this week. Mondays Delta and Redfield to shed some light? Unless any come out tonight with more work today
A lot of people polled on Friday, who had heard the news on Radio 2 or Greatest Hits Radio at 7am and gone to work, will have been blissfully unaware. It didn’t kick off properly until he apologised.. what, around 9am? He should probably be grateful for the IDF rescuing/killing some people to stop it leading as much today and filling a whole two-day sample window.
A Whitehall source said Cameron was “apoplectic” about Sunak’s decision but, when asked why he had not “picked Sunak up by his lapels”, he said: “There is only so much I can do.”
There was also fury at Buckingham Palace, where courtiers pointed out that the King, who is being treated for cancer, was advised not to travel but was determined to do so, despite being in pain. Advertisement
While the Tories are this weekend engaged in a circular firing squad to identify who to blame, the truth is, as one insider put it, everyone’s hands are covered in blood. The issue of what to do was debated in the three-day look-ahead meeting in Conservative Campaign Headquarters (CCHQ) at 1pm on Monday at which all Sunak’s key aides were present, including Isaac Levido, his campaign director, Liam Booth-Smith, the Downing Street chief of staff, and James Forsyth, his political secretary.
Have we really reached the stage where polling with the Tories on 89 seats is greeted by their biggest cheerleader with "we'll take that"? Apparently so.
I wouldn’t describe HYUFD as the Tories biggest cheerleader. He’s avowedly partisan, but in far less of an “I know best” way than most.
One of the most objective and insightful partisan commentators on here, up there with Nick Palmer when he’s not talking up Labour prospects in Lib Dem targets.
HYUFD is usually happy to be a cheerleader. But he knows when not to push it too far!
You do all realise, don’t you, that in 1997 the Labour leads were almost comparable to this time at this stage? The difference was a few more in the mid teens. They didn’t narrow until two weeks out and then, in the real deal, it wound up at 12.5%
Are you sure we’re not all overdoing this? That in fact this will be closer to the 1997 result? Corollary, the RefUK ‘surge’ is about as real as the YouthQuake?
We are overdoing it. All this talk of zero seats for the Tories is madness. Total madness. Even the idea of the Tories slipping into third is fun as a joke but it's not going to happen.
You do all realise, don’t you, that in 1997 the Labour leads were almost comparable to this time at this stage? The difference was a few more in the mid teens. They didn’t narrow until two weeks out and then, in the real deal, it wound up at 12.5%
Are you sure we’re not all overdoing this? That in fact this will be closer to the 1997 result? Corollary, the RefUK ‘surge’ is about as real as the YouthQuake?
We are overdoing it. All this talk of zero seats for the Tories is madness. Total madness. Even the idea of the Tories slipping into third is fun as a joke but it's not going to happen.
Which is why earlier today and yesterday (when panic was at a peak) was a great time to buy.
Well, there is because something can be saved from that.
But I'm now in a place where I wonder just how much more damage Sunak can do in the next 4 weeks.
He will certainly make more mistakes. I'd far rather take the risk of David Cameron playing nightwatchman now, to be honest.
Cameron can take over the campaign. He can, through some form of internal shenanigans, become leader of the Conservative Party. I have huge doubts as to whether he can become PM though, huge doubts. I don’t see how it works. So you’re running a campaign with no idea who will be PM if you win. How does that work unless you just admit defeat and say you want to be a strong opposition? I don’t get it.
He can't become leader of the party.
Conservative Party Constitution, part iii section 10:
There shall be a Leader of the Party (referred to in this Constitution as “the Leader”) drawn from those elected to the House of Commons
And because Lord Cameron cannot become leader of the Conservative Party, he cannot be Prime Minister.
Oliver Dowden is deputy PM so if Rishi were to fall under a bus, it would probably be he who takes over.
But, right now, no-one is elected to the Commons.
Yes, but the government is still the government, and the Prime Minister remains Prime Minister until he resigns, a few minutes before his successor is appointed.
If Sunak resigned as PM the King would take his advice on his successor which, given there's a Tory government already in place as the King's ministers, would be a Tory until such time as the lay of the land of the new HoC was clear post election.
Whereupon another resignation and appointment might take place.
Which brings us back to Oliver Dowden as the most likely successor but barring accidents with buses, this will not happen.
Well, there is because something can be saved from that.
But I'm now in a place where I wonder just how much more damage Sunak can do in the next 4 weeks.
He will certainly make more mistakes. I'd far rather take the risk of David Cameron playing nightwatchman now, to be honest.
Cameron can take over the campaign. He can, through some form of internal shenanigans, become leader of the Conservative Party. I have huge doubts as to whether he can become PM though, huge doubts. I don’t see how it works. So you’re running a campaign with no idea who will be PM if you win. How does that work unless you just admit defeat and say you want to be a strong opposition? I don’t get it.
He can't become leader of the party.
Conservative Party Constitution, part iii section 10:
There shall be a Leader of the Party (referred to in this Constitution as “the Leader”) drawn from those elected to the House of Commons
And because Lord Cameron cannot become leader of the Conservative Party, he cannot be Prime Minister.
Oliver Dowden is deputy PM so if Rishi were to fall under a bus, it would probably be he who takes over.
But, right now, no-one is elected to the Commons.
Yes, but the government is still the government, and the Prime Minister remains Prime Minister until he resigns, a few minutes before his successor is appointed.
If Sunak resigned as PM the King would take his advice on his successor which, given there's a Tory government already in place as the King's ministers, would be a Tory until such time as the lay of the land of the new HoC was clear post election.
Whereupon another resignation and appointment might take place.
Constitutionally it is not a “Tory” Government. That’s a convenient shorthand based on the fact that prime ministers are appointed based on their ability to command confidence in the House of Commons. The label we attached, for convenience, to that majority in the recent Parliament was the “Conservative” or “Tory” party. At the moment the PM is in place as a result of the outcome of the last election. There is no mechanism or precedent for a party that does not (by definition) command such confidence.
The Monarch’s role in appointing a prime minister is one of the remaining prerogative powers. The majority of those powers are exercised on his behalf by ministers, but the power to appoint prime ministers remains with the King. In the absence of any majority in the Commons, or any members of the Commons, appointing a member of one party over any other would be a nakedly political decision taken, as you accept, during an election campaign for the benefit of one party. The late Queen would never have done that and I sure as hell hope the current King wouldn’t either.
If Sunak resigned as PM all bets are off until the election. Charles may fancy doing it himself for a few weeks.
Well, there is because something can be saved from that.
But I'm now in a place where I wonder just how much more damage Sunak can do in the next 4 weeks.
He will certainly make more mistakes. I'd far rather take the risk of David Cameron playing nightwatchman now, to be honest.
Cameron can take over the campaign. He can, through some form of internal shenanigans, become leader of the Conservative Party. I have huge doubts as to whether he can become PM though, huge doubts. I don’t see how it works. So you’re running a campaign with no idea who will be PM if you win. How does that work unless you just admit defeat and say you want to be a strong opposition? I don’t get it.
He can't become leader of the party.
Conservative Party Constitution, part iii section 10:
There shall be a Leader of the Party (referred to in this Constitution as “the Leader”) drawn from those elected to the House of Commons
And because Lord Cameron cannot become leader of the Conservative Party, he cannot be Prime Minister.
Oliver Dowden is deputy PM so if Rishi were to fall under a bus, it would probably be he who takes over.
But, right now, no-one is elected to the Commons.
Yes, but the government is still the government, and the Prime Minister remains Prime Minister until he resigns, a few minutes before his successor is appointed.
Does CR realise that being leader of the Tories and PM are, technically, two separate roles?
Just wait until the next Tory leader comes in and maybe they will legally combine the two?
(No I don't really believe that, though I know people who would).
A Whitehall source said Cameron was “apoplectic” about Sunak’s decision but, when asked why he had not “picked Sunak up by his lapels”, he said: “There is only so much I can do.”
There was also fury at Buckingham Palace, where courtiers pointed out that the King, who is being treated for cancer, was advised not to travel but was determined to do so, despite being in pain. Advertisement
While the Tories are this weekend engaged in a circular firing squad to identify who to blame, the truth is, as one insider put it, everyone’s hands are covered in blood. The issue of what to do was debated in the three-day look-ahead meeting in Conservative Campaign Headquarters (CCHQ) at 1pm on Monday at which all Sunak’s key aides were present, including Isaac Levido, his campaign director, Liam Booth-Smith, the Downing Street chief of staff, and James Forsyth, his political secretary.
The fact that the King did what was required of him, when he actually had a reasonable excuse to leave it to the Prince of Wales, is not much remarked upon but only serves to make cut-and-run Rishi look even worse.
Not so much a matter of what were they thinking, but were they actually thinking at all?
Like almost every aspect of the Conservative election campaign, starting with calling the election six months early, it makes no sense. Nothing makes sense; nothing is rational.
You do all realise, don’t you, that in 1997 the Labour leads were almost comparable to this time at this stage? The difference was a few more in the mid teens. They didn’t narrow until two weeks out and then, in the real deal, it wound up at 12.5%
Are you sure we’re not all overdoing this? That in fact this will be closer to the 1997 result? Corollary, the RefUK ‘surge’ is about as real as the YouthQuake?
We are overdoing it. All this talk of zero seats for the Tories is madness. Total madness. Even the idea of the Tories slipping into third is fun as a joke but it's not going to happen.
0 seats is madness. Sub 100 is unlikely but not madness.
Election campaigns are more fun if you allow yourself to get carried away and overdo it anyway. So long as you don't base your betting position on it!
More than MOE fall for Labour tho. What if they dip below 40? This is getting SLIGHTLY interesting
The last 5 Opiniums have been:
45% 41% 43% 40% 41%
Tonight’s 42% is all part of MOE
No. With modern sampling techniques, and sample sizes, you’re almost certainly seeing movement in that time series, albeit up and then down again. It’s not MOE noise.
Also they changed their methodology during the sequence. Which instantly looked very harsh on Labour, drastically down where other pollsters had given them a good week.
Well, there is because something can be saved from that.
But I'm now in a place where I wonder just how much more damage Sunak can do in the next 4 weeks.
He will certainly make more mistakes. I'd far rather take the risk of David Cameron playing nightwatchman now, to be honest.
Cameron can take over the campaign. He can, through some form of internal shenanigans, become leader of the Conservative Party. I have huge doubts as to whether he can become PM though, huge doubts. I don’t see how it works. So you’re running a campaign with no idea who will be PM if you win. How does that work unless you just admit defeat and say you want to be a strong opposition? I don’t get it.
He can't become leader of the party.
Conservative Party Constitution, part iii section 10:
There shall be a Leader of the Party (referred to in this Constitution as “the Leader”) drawn from those elected to the House of Commons
And because Lord Cameron cannot become leader of the Conservative Party, he cannot be Prime Minister.
Oliver Dowden is deputy PM so if Rishi were to fall under a bus, it would probably be he who takes over.
But, right now, no-one is elected to the Commons.
Yes, but the government is still the government, and the Prime Minister remains Prime Minister until he resigns, a few minutes before his successor is appointed.
If Sunak resigned as PM the King would take his advice on his successor which, given there's a Tory government already in place as the King's ministers, would be a Tory until such time as the lay of the land of the new HoC was clear post election.
Whereupon another resignation and appointment might take place.
Constitutionally it is not a “Tory” Government. That’s a convenient shorthand based on the fact that prime ministers are appointed based on their ability to command confidence in the House of Commons. The label we attached, for convenience, to that majority in the recent Parliament was the “Conservative” or “Tory” party. At the moment the PM is in place as a result of the outcome of the last election. There is no mechanism or precedent for a party that does not (by definition) command such confidence.
The Monarch’s role in appointing a prime minister is one of the remaining prerogative powers. The majority of those powers are exercised on his behalf by ministers, but the power to appoint prime ministers remains with the King. In the absence of any majority in the Commons, or any members of the Commons, appointing a member of one party over any other would be a nakedly political decision taken, as you accept, during an election campaign for the benefit of one party. The late Queen would never have done that and I sure as hell hope the current King wouldn’t either.
If Sunak resigned as PM all bets are off until the election. Charles may fancy doing it himself for a few weeks.
That can't be right, surely? What if Sunak got hit by a bus? Surely the monarch would in practice just appoint the least controversial choice - which would surely be a cabinet member. Hunt, probably. He could in principle appoint who he likes, but there are lots of things he could do in principle but doesn't. That's how a constitutional monarchy works.
A Whitehall source said Cameron was “apoplectic” about Sunak’s decision but, when asked why he had not “picked Sunak up by his lapels”, he said: “There is only so much I can do.”
There was also fury at Buckingham Palace, where courtiers pointed out that the King, who is being treated for cancer, was advised not to travel but was determined to do so, despite being in pain. Advertisement
While the Tories are this weekend engaged in a circular firing squad to identify who to blame, the truth is, as one insider put it, everyone’s hands are covered in blood. The issue of what to do was debated in the three-day look-ahead meeting in Conservative Campaign Headquarters (CCHQ) at 1pm on Monday at which all Sunak’s key aides were present, including Isaac Levido, his campaign director, Liam Booth-Smith, the Downing Street chief of staff, and James Forsyth, his political secretary.
Well, there is because something can be saved from that.
But I'm now in a place where I wonder just how much more damage Sunak can do in the next 4 weeks.
He will certainly make more mistakes. I'd far rather take the risk of David Cameron playing nightwatchman now, to be honest.
Cameron can take over the campaign. He can, through some form of internal shenanigans, become leader of the Conservative Party. I have huge doubts as to whether he can become PM though, huge doubts. I don’t see how it works. So you’re running a campaign with no idea who will be PM if you win. How does that work unless you just admit defeat and say you want to be a strong opposition? I don’t get it.
He can't become leader of the party.
Conservative Party Constitution, part iii section 10:
There shall be a Leader of the Party (referred to in this Constitution as “the Leader”) drawn from those elected to the House of Commons
And because Lord Cameron cannot become leader of the Conservative Party, he cannot be Prime Minister.
Oliver Dowden is deputy PM so if Rishi were to fall under a bus, it would probably be he who takes over.
But, right now, no-one is elected to the Commons.
Yes, but the government is still the government, and the Prime Minister remains Prime Minister until he resigns, a few minutes before his successor is appointed.
If Sunak resigned as PM the King would take his advice on his successor which, given there's a Tory government already in place as the King's ministers, would be a Tory until such time as the lay of the land of the new HoC was clear post election.
Whereupon another resignation and appointment might take place.
If Sunak resigned as PM all bets are off until the election. Charles may fancy doing it himself for a few weeks.
And people might like it so much at the next election William would stand so he could become Prime Minister.
Well, there is because something can be saved from that.
But I'm now in a place where I wonder just how much more damage Sunak can do in the next 4 weeks.
He will certainly make more mistakes. I'd far rather take the risk of David Cameron playing nightwatchman now, to be honest.
Cameron can take over the campaign. He can, through some form of internal shenanigans, become leader of the Conservative Party. I have huge doubts as to whether he can become PM though, huge doubts. I don’t see how it works. So you’re running a campaign with no idea who will be PM if you win. How does that work unless you just admit defeat and say you want to be a strong opposition? I don’t get it.
He can't become leader of the party.
Conservative Party Constitution, part iii section 10:
There shall be a Leader of the Party (referred to in this Constitution as “the Leader”) drawn from those elected to the House of Commons
And because Lord Cameron cannot become leader of the Conservative Party, he cannot be Prime Minister.
Oliver Dowden is deputy PM so if Rishi were to fall under a bus, it would probably be he who takes over.
But, right now, no-one is elected to the Commons.
Yes, but the government is still the government, and the Prime Minister remains Prime Minister until he resigns, a few minutes before his successor is appointed.
If Sunak resigned as PM the King would take his advice on his successor which, given there's a Tory government already in place as the King's ministers, would be a Tory until such time as the lay of the land of the new HoC was clear post election.
Whereupon another resignation and appointment might take place.
Which brings us back to Oliver Dowden as the most likely successor but barring accidents with buses, this will not happen.
The Tories could do with standardising what they mean by Deputy PM and First Secretary of State.
The Labour Deputy has their own mandate in the Party is makes sense as the “PM hit by bus” first reserve. However it varies a bit for the Tories. Staying recent, did they “mean” it:
- Hesletine? Yes. - Hague? Yes. - Osborne? Yes. - Lidington? Maybe.. - Green? No. - Raab? Well he was so we have to say yes, but… - Dowden? LOL
Well, there is because something can be saved from that.
But I'm now in a place where I wonder just how much more damage Sunak can do in the next 4 weeks.
He will certainly make more mistakes. I'd far rather take the risk of David Cameron playing nightwatchman now, to be honest.
Cameron can take over the campaign. He can, through some form of internal shenanigans, become leader of the Conservative Party. I have huge doubts as to whether he can become PM though, huge doubts. I don’t see how it works. So you’re running a campaign with no idea who will be PM if you win. How does that work unless you just admit defeat and say you want to be a strong opposition? I don’t get it.
Well, constitutionally there's nothing stopping a PM being from the Lords.
Understood. But what constitutional principle requires the King to appoint Cameron as opposed to, say, Angela Smith, Baroness Smith of Basildon, who is the leader of the Labour Party in the Lords? There’s nothing binding him to the choice of Cameron as no one has a Commons majority.
Most likely to command the confidence of the Commons. Since there are no MPs there is an argument to say that he could appoint Starmer. The next time the Commons meets, that's the likely outcome. I don't expect that would be the choice made, but it's possible. It would be a terrible bind for the king.
I don't think this is going to happen, but theoretically Sunak could announce that he's quitting as party leader, but will stay as caretaker PM until the election. That satisfies the constitution, the only difficulty being how internally to the conservative party they can make clear to the king now, who it is that would have the confidence of their parliamentary party after the election (in the unlikely event that they could obtain a plurality under such circumstances). Ordinarily the 1922 committee could meet to make a rule covering the case - but does it even exist during an election, since there are no MPs?
The Labour lead is now 18 points · Labour 42% (-3) · Conservatives 24% (-1) · Lib Dems 10% (+2) · SNP 3% (n/c) · Greens 7% (+1) · Reform 12% (+1)
Fieldwork: 5 - 7 June. Changes from 29 - 31 May.
Tiny tiny trend of Labour leads being clipped a bit.
True indeed. The full impact of D-Daygate is not in this poll though.
Fwiw I'd expect D-Daygate to produce no change. Rather, it's main effect is likely to be to dissuade any who have already deserted the Conservatives from going back. It has nullified any rally round the flag effect that might have boosted the Tories.
We have a seagulls nest next door but one, (we had them 3 years ago but with protecting netting they left) and a wee chick fell out of the nest onto our neighbours drive
The poor thing is so vulnerable but as advised by the RSPB it is one of those things and the parents will protect and feed the chick, though we do have foxes at night as evidenced on our security cameras so as the RSPB said ultimately it is natural selection
This has been going on since late morning and the parents are vicious to anyone approaching the wee creature and it is genuinely amazing to watch the parents as they protect and feed their little one
Unfortunately it is constant noise from the parents which I expect to continue as long as the chick survives
Just telling this story as nature continues, no matter the chaos in politics
Well, there is because something can be saved from that.
But I'm now in a place where I wonder just how much more damage Sunak can do in the next 4 weeks.
He will certainly make more mistakes. I'd far rather take the risk of David Cameron playing nightwatchman now, to be honest.
Cameron can take over the campaign. He can, through some form of internal shenanigans, become leader of the Conservative Party. I have huge doubts as to whether he can become PM though, huge doubts. I don’t see how it works. So you’re running a campaign with no idea who will be PM if you win. How does that work unless you just admit defeat and say you want to be a strong opposition? I don’t get it.
Well, constitutionally there's nothing stopping a PM being from the Lords.
Understood. But what constitutional principle requires the King to appoint Cameron as opposed to, say, Angela Smith, Baroness Smith of Basildon, who is the leader of the Labour Party in the Lords? There’s nothing binding him to the choice of Cameron as no one has a Commons majority.
The King would refuse the resignation initially as nobody can demonstrate the confidence of the House of his subjects representatives whilst it does not sit, remind Sunak of his responsibility to the nation. If Sunak insisted he'd probably only be able to appoint from within the government and on a caretaker basis. Or perhaps would exercise the reserved powers personally with the help of the Privy Council pending the election.
In absolute extremis, rather than your last option I reckon you’d pick a non-political but qualified Lord rather than him do it. Gus O’Donnell say. Everyone would believe he’d be a caretaker only, so he’d command the notional parliament until Starmer kissed hands, and it keeps the King clean.
For all the reasons everyone’s said, I just don’t see him resigning immediately (until about 8am on July 5th, anyway).
However, if he *did*, or became seriously incapacitated, my money would be on the King asking the Cabinet to nominate one of its number.
1. In the absence of the Commons, the caretaker govt is the best he has for constitutionally/democratically-legitimate advice. 2. The cabinet are all Privy Counsellors, who have an added layer of supra-party legit. (Though I guess he might check in with Starmer and Davey for added protection) 3. Not an expert, but seems to me there’s a strong presumption when Royals actually have to make a decision, to favour the status quo ante.
Well, there is because something can be saved from that.
But I'm now in a place where I wonder just how much more damage Sunak can do in the next 4 weeks.
He will certainly make more mistakes. I'd far rather take the risk of David Cameron playing nightwatchman now, to be honest.
Cameron can take over the campaign. He can, through some form of internal shenanigans, become leader of the Conservative Party. I have huge doubts as to whether he can become PM though, huge doubts. I don’t see how it works. So you’re running a campaign with no idea who will be PM if you win. How does that work unless you just admit defeat and say you want to be a strong opposition? I don’t get it.
Well, constitutionally there's nothing stopping a PM being from the Lords.
Understood. But what constitutional principle requires the King to appoint Cameron as opposed to, say, Angela Smith, Baroness Smith of Basildon, who is the leader of the Labour Party in the Lords? There’s nothing binding him to the choice of Cameron as no one has a Commons majority.
Most likely to command the confidence of the Commons. Since there are no MPs there is an argument to say that he could appoint Starmer. The next time the Commons meets, that's the likely outcome. I don't expect that would be the choice made, but it's possible. It would be a terrible bind for the king.
I don't think this is going to happen, but theoretically Sunak could announce that he's quitting as party leader, but will stay as caretaker PM until the election. That satisfies the constitution, the only difficulty being how internally to the conservative party they can make clear to the king now, who it is that would have the confidence of their parliamentary party after the election (in the unlikely event that they could obtain a plurality under such circumstances). Ordinarily the 1922 committee could meet to make a rule covering the case - but does it even exist during an election, since there are no MPs?
Cabinet select someone who HMK appoints until the Tories leadership election concludes then PM resigns in favour of new leader
A Whitehall source said Cameron was “apoplectic” about Sunak’s decision but, when asked why he had not “picked Sunak up by his lapels”, he said: “There is only so much I can do.”
There was also fury at Buckingham Palace, where courtiers pointed out that the King, who is being treated for cancer, was advised not to travel but was determined to do so, despite being in pain. Advertisement
While the Tories are this weekend engaged in a circular firing squad to identify who to blame, the truth is, as one insider put it, everyone’s hands are covered in blood. The issue of what to do was debated in the three-day look-ahead meeting in Conservative Campaign Headquarters (CCHQ) at 1pm on Monday at which all Sunak’s key aides were present, including Isaac Levido, his campaign director, Liam Booth-Smith, the Downing Street chief of staff, and James Forsyth, his political secretary.
The fact that the King did what was required of him, when he actually had a reasonable excuse to leave it to the Prince of Wales, is not much remarked upon but only serves to make cut-and-run Rishi look even worse.
Not so much a matter of what were they thinking, but were they actually thinking at all?
Like almost every aspect of the Conservative election campaign, starting with calling the election six months early, it makes no sense. Nothing makes sense; nothing is rational.
The early election would've made sense if the Chancellor had pulled out more rabbits (in particular bribes for the core vote) in the Spring Budget, and the election was called immediately off the back of it. Why in the name of God they ended up going for it in no man's land, not either late April/early May or the Autumn, is one for the historians to unravel.
Well, there is because something can be saved from that.
But I'm now in a place where I wonder just how much more damage Sunak can do in the next 4 weeks.
He will certainly make more mistakes. I'd far rather take the risk of David Cameron playing nightwatchman now, to be honest.
Cameron can take over the campaign. He can, through some form of internal shenanigans, become leader of the Conservative Party. I have huge doubts as to whether he can become PM though, huge doubts. I don’t see how it works. So you’re running a campaign with no idea who will be PM if you win. How does that work unless you just admit defeat and say you want to be a strong opposition? I don’t get it.
He can't become leader of the party.
Conservative Party Constitution, part iii section 10:
There shall be a Leader of the Party (referred to in this Constitution as “the Leader”) drawn from those elected to the House of Commons
And because Lord Cameron cannot become leader of the Conservative Party, he cannot be Prime Minister.
Oliver Dowden is deputy PM so if Rishi were to fall under a bus, it would probably be he who takes over.
But, right now, no-one is elected to the Commons.
Yes, but the government is still the government, and the Prime Minister remains Prime Minister until he resigns, a few minutes before his successor is appointed.
If Sunak resigned as PM the King would take his advice on his successor which, given there's a Tory government already in place as the King's ministers, would be a Tory until such time as the lay of the land of the new HoC was clear post election.
Whereupon another resignation and appointment might take place.
Constitutionally it is not a “Tory” Government. That’s a convenient shorthand based on the fact that prime ministers are appointed based on their ability to command confidence in the House of Commons. The label we attached, for convenience, to that majority in the recent Parliament was the “Conservative” or “Tory” party. At the moment the PM is in place as a result of the outcome of the last election. There is no mechanism or precedent for a party that does not (by definition) command such confidence.
The Monarch’s role in appointing a prime minister is one of the remaining prerogative powers. The majority of those powers are exercised on his behalf by ministers, but the power to appoint prime ministers remains with the King. In the absence of any majority in the Commons, or any members of the Commons, appointing a member of one party over any other would be a nakedly political decision taken, as you accept, during an election campaign for the benefit of one party. The late Queen would never have done that and I sure as hell hope the current King wouldn’t either.
If Sunak resigned as PM all bets are off until the election. Charles may fancy doing it himself for a few weeks.
That can't be right, surely? What if Sunak got hit by a bus? Surely the monarch would in practice just appoint the least controversial choice - which would surely be a cabinet member. Hunt, probably. He could in principle appoint who he likes, but there are lots of things he could do in principle but doesn't. That's how a constitutional monarchy works.
As I make clear in the 2nd para of my post I’m talking about the situation advocated by CR where Sunak quits and Cameron is appointed to help the Tory party during its election campaign. That would make the resignation and appointment a political decision.
If Sunak were to pass away as you suggest, while it’s never been done, I think few would object to Oliver Dowden, as deputy PM, stepping in for the interim. It’s not perfect but it’s a necessity, CR’s scenario is all about helping the Tories.
Well, there is because something can be saved from that.
But I'm now in a place where I wonder just how much more damage Sunak can do in the next 4 weeks.
He will certainly make more mistakes. I'd far rather take the risk of David Cameron playing nightwatchman now, to be honest.
Cameron can take over the campaign. He can, through some form of internal shenanigans, become leader of the Conservative Party. I have huge doubts as to whether he can become PM though, huge doubts. I don’t see how it works. So you’re running a campaign with no idea who will be PM if you win. How does that work unless you just admit defeat and say you want to be a strong opposition? I don’t get it.
He can't become leader of the party.
Conservative Party Constitution, part iii section 10:
There shall be a Leader of the Party (referred to in this Constitution as “the Leader”) drawn from those elected to the House of Commons
And because Lord Cameron cannot become leader of the Conservative Party, he cannot be Prime Minister.
Oliver Dowden is deputy PM so if Rishi were to fall under a bus, it would probably be he who takes over.
But, right now, no-one is elected to the Commons.
Yes, but the government is still the government, and the Prime Minister remains Prime Minister until he resigns, a few minutes before his successor is appointed.
If Sunak resigned as PM the King would take his advice on his successor which, given there's a Tory government already in place as the King's ministers, would be a Tory until such time as the lay of the land of the new HoC was clear post election.
Whereupon another resignation and appointment might take place.
Constitutionally it is not a “Tory” Government. That’s a convenient shorthand based on the fact that prime ministers are appointed based on their ability to command confidence in the House of Commons. The label we attached, for convenience, to that majority in the recent Parliament was the “Conservative” or “Tory” party. At the moment the PM is in place as a result of the outcome of the last election. There is no mechanism or precedent for a party that does not (by definition) command such confidence.
The Monarch’s role in appointing a prime minister is one of the remaining prerogative powers. The majority of those powers are exercised on his behalf by ministers, but the power to appoint prime ministers remains with the King. In the absence of any majority in the Commons, or any members of the Commons, appointing a member of one party over any other would be a nakedly political decision taken, as you accept, during an election campaign for the benefit of one party. The late Queen would never have done that and I sure as hell hope the current King wouldn’t either.
If Sunak resigned as PM all bets are off until the election. Charles may fancy doing it himself for a few weeks.
No, the Monarch would take the least contentious decision which would be to appoint a member of the existing administration and not create a change where no mandate existed.
If a new HoC was elected that was different he would no longer have its confidence, so would resign, just as Sunak would have done in a month's time anyway.
Well, there is because something can be saved from that.
But I'm now in a place where I wonder just how much more damage Sunak can do in the next 4 weeks.
He will certainly make more mistakes. I'd far rather take the risk of David Cameron playing nightwatchman now, to be honest.
Cameron can take over the campaign. He can, through some form of internal shenanigans, become leader of the Conservative Party. I have huge doubts as to whether he can become PM though, huge doubts. I don’t see how it works. So you’re running a campaign with no idea who will be PM if you win. How does that work unless you just admit defeat and say you want to be a strong opposition? I don’t get it.
Well, constitutionally there's nothing stopping a PM being from the Lords.
Understood. But what constitutional principle requires the King to appoint Cameron as opposed to, say, Angela Smith, Baroness Smith of Basildon, who is the leader of the Labour Party in the Lords? There’s nothing binding him to the choice of Cameron as no one has a Commons majority.
Most likely to command the confidence of the Commons. Since there are no MPs there is an argument to say that he could appoint Starmer. The next time the Commons meets, that's the likely outcome. I don't expect that would be the choice made, but it's possible. It would be a terrible bind for the king.
I don't think this is going to happen, but theoretically Sunak could announce that he's quitting as party leader, but will stay as caretaker PM until the election. That satisfies the constitution, the only difficulty being how internally to the conservative party they can make clear to the king now, who it is that would have the confidence of their parliamentary party after the election (in the unlikely event that they could obtain a plurality under such circumstances). Ordinarily the 1922 committee could meet to make a rule covering the case - but does it even exist during an election, since there are no MPs?
I am sure Labour have already wargamed and prepared material along the lines of
"Vote Starmer you know what you're getting, vote Tory and get who knows?"
It really is not tenable to dump a leader in favour of an unknown in mid campaign. There lies the Tory party imploding completely.
We have a seagulls nest next door but one, (we had them 3 years ago but with protecting netting they left) and a wee chick fell out of the nest onto our neighbours drive
The poor thing is so vulnerable but as advised by the RSPB it is one of those things and the parents will protect and feed the chick, though we do have foxes at night as evidenced on our security cameras so as the RSPB said ultimately it is natural selection
This has been going on since late morning and the parents are vicious to anyone approaching the wee creature and it is genuinely amazing to watch the parents as they protect and feed their little one
Unfortunately it is constant noise from the parents which I expect to continue as long as the chick survives
Just telling this story as nature continues, no matter the chaos in politics
Well, there is because something can be saved from that.
But I'm now in a place where I wonder just how much more damage Sunak can do in the next 4 weeks.
He will certainly make more mistakes. I'd far rather take the risk of David Cameron playing nightwatchman now, to be honest.
Cameron can take over the campaign. He can, through some form of internal shenanigans, become leader of the Conservative Party. I have huge doubts as to whether he can become PM though, huge doubts. I don’t see how it works. So you’re running a campaign with no idea who will be PM if you win. How does that work unless you just admit defeat and say you want to be a strong opposition? I don’t get it.
He can't become leader of the party.
Conservative Party Constitution, part iii section 10:
There shall be a Leader of the Party (referred to in this Constitution as “the Leader”) drawn from those elected to the House of Commons
And because Lord Cameron cannot become leader of the Conservative Party, he cannot be Prime Minister.
Oliver Dowden is deputy PM so if Rishi were to fall under a bus, it would probably be he who takes over.
It is true that under the current party rules Cameron can't be leader. It is much more doubtful that he cannot be PM (constitutionally that is. not WRT the current election); there is a clear and long convention that he can't, strengthened a bit by the events of 1963, but there is no clear and absolute bar to it. Normally the king calls for the leader of the relevant party, but if that leader asked the king to call for Lord Backwoodsman instead then I think he would do so.
For that to happen there would have to be some sort of emergency; that is exactly when the rules and conventions develop. (PS The king is going to cal for SKS and not Lord Emsworth.)
We have a seagulls nest next door but one, (we had them 3 years ago but with protecting netting they left) and a wee chick fell out of the nest onto our neighbours drive
The poor thing is so vulnerable but as advised by the RSPB it is one of those things and the parents will protect and feed the chick, though we do have foxes at night as evidenced on our security cameras so as the RSPB said ultimately it is natural selection
This has been going on since late morning and the parents are vicious to anyone approaching the wee creature and it is genuinely amazing to watch the parents as they protect and feed their little one
Unfortunately it is constant noise from the parents which I expect to continue as long as the chick survives
Just telling this story as nature continues, no matter the chaos in politics
Wow. We have our fair share of them in Teignmouth.
So, presumably this has left other chicks on the roof? Are the parents going back and forth from driveway to roof?
As an aside, seagulls are not everyone’s favourite bird but as you know they’re protected so no one is allowed to harm them, including their nests.
The Labour lead is now 18 points · Labour 42% (-3) · Conservatives 24% (-1) · Lib Dems 10% (+2) · SNP 3% (n/c) · Greens 7% (+1) · Reform 12% (+1)
Fieldwork: 5 - 7 June. Changes from 29 - 31 May.
The whacky adventures of zany Centrist Dad and carer Ed Davey going well.
Zany centrist dad and carer and hero, we now learn thanks to whoever posted Ed Davey's railway adventures. Unfortunately Vanilla's search function is still useless.
A Whitehall source said Cameron was “apoplectic” about Sunak’s decision but, when asked why he had not “picked Sunak up by his lapels”, he said: “There is only so much I can do.”
There was also fury at Buckingham Palace, where courtiers pointed out that the King, who is being treated for cancer, was advised not to travel but was determined to do so, despite being in pain. Advertisement
While the Tories are this weekend engaged in a circular firing squad to identify who to blame, the truth is, as one insider put it, everyone’s hands are covered in blood. The issue of what to do was debated in the three-day look-ahead meeting in Conservative Campaign Headquarters (CCHQ) at 1pm on Monday at which all Sunak’s key aides were present, including Isaac Levido, his campaign director, Liam Booth-Smith, the Downing Street chief of staff, and James Forsyth, his political secretary.
The fact that the King did what was required of him, when he actually had a reasonable excuse to leave it to the Prince of Wales, is not much remarked upon but only serves to make cut-and-run Rishi look even worse.
Not so much a matter of what were they thinking, but were they actually thinking at all?
Like almost every aspect of the Conservative election campaign, starting with calling the election six months early, it makes no sense. Nothing makes sense; nothing is rational.
The early election would've made sense if the Chancellor had pulled out more rabbits (in particular bribes for the core vote) in the Spring Budget, and the election was called immediately off the back of it. Why in the name of God they ended up going for it in no man's land, not either late April/early May or the Autumn, is one for the historians to unravel.
Suspect that they saw no room for Autumn tax cuts so went now to avoid that political fallout,
Well, there is because something can be saved from that.
But I'm now in a place where I wonder just how much more damage Sunak can do in the next 4 weeks.
He will certainly make more mistakes. I'd far rather take the risk of David Cameron playing nightwatchman now, to be honest.
Cameron can take over the campaign. He can, through some form of internal shenanigans, become leader of the Conservative Party. I have huge doubts as to whether he can become PM though, huge doubts. I don’t see how it works. So you’re running a campaign with no idea who will be PM if you win. How does that work unless you just admit defeat and say you want to be a strong opposition? I don’t get it.
Well, constitutionally there's nothing stopping a PM being from the Lords.
Understood. But what constitutional principle requires the King to appoint Cameron as opposed to, say, Angela Smith, Baroness Smith of Basildon, who is the leader of the Labour Party in the Lords? There’s nothing binding him to the choice of Cameron as no one has a Commons majority.
Most likely to command the confidence of the Commons. Since there are no MPs there is an argument to say that he could appoint Starmer. The next time the Commons meets, that's the likely outcome. I don't expect that would be the choice made, but it's possible. It would be a terrible bind for the king.
I don't think this is going to happen, but theoretically Sunak could announce that he's quitting as party leader, but will stay as caretaker PM until the election. That satisfies the constitution, the only difficulty being how internally to the conservative party they can make clear to the king now, who it is that would have the confidence of their parliamentary party after the election (in the unlikely event that they could obtain a plurality under such circumstances). Ordinarily the 1922 committee could meet to make a rule covering the case - but does it even exist during an election, since there are no MPs?
Cabinet select someone who HMK appoints until the Tories leadership election concludes then PM resigns in favour of new leader
In the unlikely event of the Tories winning, whowever is selected would remain as PM until the Tory leadership election, which they'd presumably be well-placed to win.
Well, there is because something can be saved from that.
But I'm now in a place where I wonder just how much more damage Sunak can do in the next 4 weeks.
He will certainly make more mistakes. I'd far rather take the risk of David Cameron playing nightwatchman now, to be honest.
Cameron can take over the campaign. He can, through some form of internal shenanigans, become leader of the Conservative Party. I have huge doubts as to whether he can become PM though, huge doubts. I don’t see how it works. So you’re running a campaign with no idea who will be PM if you win. How does that work unless you just admit defeat and say you want to be a strong opposition? I don’t get it.
Well, constitutionally there's nothing stopping a PM being from the Lords.
Understood. But what constitutional principle requires the King to appoint Cameron as opposed to, say, Angela Smith, Baroness Smith of Basildon, who is the leader of the Labour Party in the Lords? There’s nothing binding him to the choice of Cameron as no one has a Commons majority.
The King would refuse the resignation initially as nobody can demonstrate the confidence of the House of his subjects representatives whilst it does not sit, remind Sunak of his responsibility to the nation. If Sunak insisted he'd probably only be able to appoint from within the government and on a caretaker basis. Or perhaps would exercise the reserved powers personally with the help of the Privy Council pending the election.
In absolute extremis, rather than your last option I reckon you’d pick a non-political but qualified Lord rather than him do it. Gus O’Donnell say. Everyone would believe he’d be a caretaker only, so he’d command the notional parliament until Starmer kissed hands, and it keeps the King clean.
For all the reasons everyone’s said, I just don’t see him resigning immediately (until about 8am on July 5th, anyway).
However, if he *did*, or became seriously incapacitated, my money would be on the King asking the Cabinet to nominate one of its number.
1. In the absence of the Commons, the caretaker govt is the best he has for constitutionally/democratically-legitimate advice. 2. The cabinet are all Privy Counsellors, who have an added layer of supra-party legit. (Though I guess he might check in with Starmer and Davey for added protection) 3. Not an expert, but seems to me there’s a strong presumption when Royals actually have to make a decision, to favour the status quo ante.
You’re right about the status quo. I think it’s a case of that option being “no change” and mine being “technocrat be seen to avoid empowering a politician during an election”.
The harm is be trying to avoid is the act of elevating Dowden being seen to change the result as people flocked to him partly as “the King’s man” (stop sniggering at the back).
As we’ve all said - this is a thought experiment only.
Some polls say the Tories are 12 points ahead of ReFuk, others say they're tied. Clear as mud.
They are closest with Redfield and YouGov followed by Techne and WeThink YouGov are the friendliest generally to reform and have been all along. What Redfield and Techne have in common is they both consistently show Tories losing the over 65 to Lab by 10 points or so......
After Disaster Day on Thursday that figure is quite plausible.
The over 65s don't like the sound of the end of the NHS as proposed by Farage.
You do all realise, don’t you, that in 1997 the Labour leads were almost comparable to this time at this stage? The difference was a few more in the mid teens. They didn’t narrow until two weeks out and then, in the real deal, it wound up at 12.5%
Are you sure we’re not all overdoing this? That in fact this will be closer to the 1997 result? Corollary, the RefUK ‘surge’ is about as real as the YouthQuake?
We are overdoing it. All this talk of zero seats for the Tories is madness. Total madness. Even the idea of the Tories slipping into third is fun as a joke but it's not going to happen.
"Yes. But what if we could?"
The momentum is going *against* the Tories, and they are already in this hell hole. To finish 3rd the Tories would have to utterly haemorrhage votes in all directions. And they are. And have RefUK radically disrupt their vote. Which shows plenty signs of happening.
Think of it. Tactical voting to 1997 levels. A punishment beating to end all punishment beatings. Combined with RefUK taking a critical chunk of their vote - just enough votes in just enough seats to hand another score or two over to opposition parties. As Brexit Party candidates did in 2019.
Why are we discussing Sunak standing down with a little over 3 weeks left?
This too is utter madness. It is NOT going to happen!
Perhaps the outcome will be 80-100 Tory seats, and Farage and possibly a couple of others elected and chipping away at the Tory core vote over a period of time.
Some polls say the Tories are 12 points ahead of ReFuk, others say they're tied. Clear as mud.
They are closest with Redfield and YouGov followed by Techne and WeThink YouGov are the friendliest generally to reform and have been all along. What Redfield and Techne have in common is they both consistently show Tories losing the over 65 to Lab by 10 points or so......
After Disaster Day on Thursday that figure is quite plausible.
The over 65s don't like the sound of the end of the NHS as proposed by Farage.
They are too distracted and distasteful of the government to notice.
We have a seagulls nest next door but one, (we had them 3 years ago but with protecting netting they left) and a wee chick fell out of the nest onto our neighbours drive
The poor thing is so vulnerable but as advised by the RSPB it is one of those things and the parents will protect and feed the chick, though we do have foxes at night as evidenced on our security cameras so as the RSPB said ultimately it is natural selection
This has been going on since late morning and the parents are vicious to anyone approaching the wee creature and it is genuinely amazing to watch the parents as they protect and feed their little one
Unfortunately it is constant noise from the parents which I expect to continue as long as the chick survives
Just telling this story as nature continues, no matter the chaos in politics
Wow. We have our fair share of them in Teignmouth.
So, presumably this has left other chicks on the roof? Are the parents going back and forth from driveway to roof?
As an aside, seagulls are not everyone’s favourite bird but as you know they’re protected so no one is allowed to harm them, including their nests.
Yes they are feeding both
It is not only seagulls who are protected, all nesting birds are and it is a very serious offence to disturb birds creating their nests, removing the nest, or damaging or removing birds eggs
Generally you cannot remove a seagull's or pigeon's nest between the 1st March and 31st October
We have a seagulls nest next door but one, (we had them 3 years ago but with protecting netting they left) and a wee chick fell out of the nest onto our neighbours drive
The poor thing is so vulnerable but as advised by the RSPB it is one of those things and the parents will protect and feed the chick, though we do have foxes at night as evidenced on our security cameras so as the RSPB said ultimately it is natural selection
This has been going on since late morning and the parents are vicious to anyone approaching the wee creature and it is genuinely amazing to watch the parents as they protect and feed their little one
Unfortunately it is constant noise from the parents which I expect to continue as long as the chick survives
Just telling this story as nature continues, no matter the chaos in politics
Well, there is because something can be saved from that.
But I'm now in a place where I wonder just how much more damage Sunak can do in the next 4 weeks.
He will certainly make more mistakes. I'd far rather take the risk of David Cameron playing nightwatchman now, to be honest.
Cameron can take over the campaign. He can, through some form of internal shenanigans, become leader of the Conservative Party. I have huge doubts as to whether he can become PM though, huge doubts. I don’t see how it works. So you’re running a campaign with no idea who will be PM if you win. How does that work unless you just admit defeat and say you want to be a strong opposition? I don’t get it.
Well, constitutionally there's nothing stopping a PM being from the Lords.
Understood. But what constitutional principle requires the King to appoint Cameron as opposed to, say, Angela Smith, Baroness Smith of Basildon, who is the leader of the Labour Party in the Lords? There’s nothing binding him to the choice of Cameron as no one has a Commons majority.
The King would refuse the resignation initially as nobody can demonstrate the confidence of the House of his subjects representatives whilst it does not sit, remind Sunak of his responsibility to the nation. If Sunak insisted he'd probably only be able to appoint from within the government and on a caretaker basis. Or perhaps would exercise the reserved powers personally with the help of the Privy Council pending the election.
In absolute extremis, rather than your last option I reckon you’d pick a non-political but qualified Lord rather than him do it. Gus O’Donnell say. Everyone would believe he’d be a caretaker only, so he’d command the notional parliament until Starmer kissed hands, and it keeps the King clean.
For all the reasons everyone’s said, I just don’t see him resigning immediately (until about 8am on July 5th, anyway).
However, if he *did*, or became seriously incapacitated, my money would be on the King asking the Cabinet to nominate one of its number.
1. In the absence of the Commons, the caretaker govt is the best he has for constitutionally/democratically-legitimate advice. 2. The cabinet are all Privy Counsellors, who have an added layer of supra-party legit. (Though I guess he might check in with Starmer and Davey for added protection) 3. Not an expert, but seems to me there’s a strong presumption when Royals actually have to make a decision, to favour the status quo ante.
You’re right about the status quo. I think it’s a case of that option being “no change” and mine being “technocrat be seen to avoid empowering a politician during an election”.
The harm is be trying to avoid is the act of elevating Dowden being seen to change the result as people flocked to him partly as “the King’s man” (stop sniggering at the back).
As we’ve all said - this is a thought experiment only.
Alternatively the King could make the Speaker acting PM pending the election.
It's crazy talk though, even the Tories are not stupid enough to have a leadership contest dominate the rest of the campaign.
Well, there is because something can be saved from that.
But I'm now in a place where I wonder just how much more damage Sunak can do in the next 4 weeks.
He will certainly make more mistakes. I'd far rather take the risk of David Cameron playing nightwatchman now, to be honest.
Cameron can take over the campaign. He can, through some form of internal shenanigans, become leader of the Conservative Party. I have huge doubts as to whether he can become PM though, huge doubts. I don’t see how it works. So you’re running a campaign with no idea who will be PM if you win. How does that work unless you just admit defeat and say you want to be a strong opposition? I don’t get it.
He can't become leader of the party.
Conservative Party Constitution, part iii section 10:
There shall be a Leader of the Party (referred to in this Constitution as “the Leader”) drawn from those elected to the House of Commons
And because Lord Cameron cannot become leader of the Conservative Party, he cannot be Prime Minister.
Oliver Dowden is deputy PM so if Rishi were to fall under a bus, it would probably be he who takes over.
But, right now, no-one is elected to the Commons.
Yes, but the government is still the government, and the Prime Minister remains Prime Minister until he resigns, a few minutes before his successor is appointed.
If Sunak resigned as PM the King would take his advice on his successor which, given there's a Tory government already in place as the King's ministers, would be a Tory until such time as the lay of the land of the new HoC was clear post election.
Whereupon another resignation and appointment might take place.
Constitutionally it is not a “Tory” Government. That’s a convenient shorthand based on the fact that prime ministers are appointed based on their ability to command confidence in the House of Commons. The label we attached, for convenience, to that majority in the recent Parliament was the “Conservative” or “Tory” party. At the moment the PM is in place as a result of the outcome of the last election. There is no mechanism or precedent for a party that does not (by definition) command such confidence.
The Monarch’s role in appointing a prime minister is one of the remaining prerogative powers. The majority of those powers are exercised on his behalf by ministers, but the power to appoint prime ministers remains with the King. In the absence of any majority in the Commons, or any members of the Commons, appointing a member of one party over any other would be a nakedly political decision taken, as you accept, during an election campaign for the benefit of one party. The late Queen would never have done that and I sure as hell hope the current King wouldn’t either.
If Sunak resigned as PM all bets are off until the election. Charles may fancy doing it himself for a few weeks.
No, the Monarch would take the least contentious decision which would be to appoint a member of the existing administration and not create a change where no mandate existed.
If a new HoC was elected that was different he would no longer have its confidence, so would resign, just as Sunak would have done in a month's time anyway.
No way. The King appointing a PM nominated to help the Tories win votes DURING an election campaign? Least contentious? That’s as contentious as it comes, it could kill the both Tory Party and the Monarchy as institutions.
Based on the downloadable csv file from your link, RefUK is boycotting Sheffield.
1 Blaenau Gwent and Rhymney
WTF? They were second in 2019 in the predecessor seat and it has a history of kicking established parties. Why would they not stand there? They won't have a better chance at any seat in Wales.
Well, there is because something can be saved from that.
But I'm now in a place where I wonder just how much more damage Sunak can do in the next 4 weeks.
He will certainly make more mistakes. I'd far rather take the risk of David Cameron playing nightwatchman now, to be honest.
Cameron can take over the campaign. He can, through some form of internal shenanigans, become leader of the Conservative Party. I have huge doubts as to whether he can become PM though, huge doubts. I don’t see how it works. So you’re running a campaign with no idea who will be PM if you win. How does that work unless you just admit defeat and say you want to be a strong opposition? I don’t get it.
He can't become leader of the party.
Conservative Party Constitution, part iii section 10:
There shall be a Leader of the Party (referred to in this Constitution as “the Leader”) drawn from those elected to the House of Commons
And because Lord Cameron cannot become leader of the Conservative Party, he cannot be Prime Minister.
Oliver Dowden is deputy PM so if Rishi were to fall under a bus, it would probably be he who takes over.
But, right now, no-one is elected to the Commons.
Yes, but the government is still the government, and the Prime Minister remains Prime Minister until he resigns, a few minutes before his successor is appointed.
If Sunak resigned as PM the King would take his advice on his successor which, given there's a Tory government already in place as the King's ministers, would be a Tory until such time as the lay of the land of the new HoC was clear post election.
Whereupon another resignation and appointment might take place.
Which brings us back to Oliver Dowden as the most likely successor but barring accidents with buses, this will not happen.
The Tories could do with standardising what they mean by Deputy PM and First Secretary of State.
The Labour Deputy has their own mandate in the Party is makes sense as the “PM hit by bus” first reserve. However it varies a bit for the Tories. Staying recent, did they “mean” it:
- Hesletine? Yes. - Hague? Yes. - Osborne? Yes. - Lidington? Maybe.. - Green? No. - Raab? Well he was so we have to say yes, but… - Dowden? LOL
Perhaps the cabinet secretary and the king, and maybe Larry and whichever is the secretary who can type in number 10 and actually runs the country, know the name of the person any current PM wants to be called on if the PM's omnibus came along at the wrong moment. Maybe they also have the password for nuclear missile access written on the back of a Waitrose receipt.
This is winnable. Fewer fireworks up front but that’s ok if they keep going steady.
The election or the Euro football? We have won several elections in my lifetime we didn't seem like winning,and pretty consistently disappointed in the football since I was very young. But I'd think it is more likely that we will the football with a clean sheet in every game than we will win this election.
Some polls say the Tories are 12 points ahead of ReFuk, others say they're tied. Clear as mud.
They are closest with Redfield and YouGov followed by Techne and WeThink YouGov are the friendliest generally to reform and have been all along. What Redfield and Techne have in common is they both consistently show Tories losing the over 65 to Lab by 10 points or so......
After Disaster Day on Thursday that figure is quite plausible.
The over 65s don't like the sound of the end of the NHS as proposed by Farage.
Techne and Redfield have been showing it since May or earlier is the point, most others have them 10 or so ahead with over 65s. Thursday isn't going to produce a 10 point ConLab swing in over 65s, it's bad, it's not pensioners rioting in the streets bad
Some polls say the Tories are 12 points ahead of ReFuk, others say they're tied. Clear as mud.
They are closest with Redfield and YouGov followed by Techne and WeThink YouGov are the friendliest generally to reform and have been all along. What Redfield and Techne have in common is they both consistently show Tories losing the over 65 to Lab by 10 points or so......
After Disaster Day on Thursday that figure is quite plausible.
The over 65s don't like the sound of the end of the NHS as proposed by Farage.
They are too distracted and distasteful of the government to notice.
I do wish we lived in a country where it was at least possible to debate different healthcare models.
I happen to favour a single, centrally run, state controlled monolith funded by taxation (I.e. fold up all the Trusts etc.); but I should have to defend that view and various European insurance based models do work (I think they work better, when they do work better, only because more cash is spent, and my model would spend it most efficiently and equally).
Now back at my computer. I hadn't been out properly before today - we'd done social media but not pressing the flesh. It is extraordinary, like nothing I have sensed since 1997, the level of anger.
Tory last time voters volunteering up the defenestration of David Duguid and our Normandy shame. A country adrift. SNP last time voters raising the terrible state of public services and wondering why Flynn is boasting about it in debates.
And I met the SNP candidate! Handshake and a photo together. Even he thinks I can come second (with a laugh, but he's serious).
What does it mean? Governing parties are in for a beating, and for the Tories I fear it may be terminal. I don't get any sense of the SNP benefiting from not being Tory - I canvassed adjacent doors to the SNP for a few minutes and they were told to go away and I was listened to. And thats in Strichen - where Alex Salmond lives.
In England? Reform are going to monster the Tories in red wall type seats, the LibDems and Labour everywhere else. Forget crossover, I think the Tories aren't going to be the official opposition.
I need to have a think about how I can craft the next round of social media stuff, but I think I stand a much better chance this weekend than I did last weekend...
I want to know your view on North Sea oil. I will probably be working in Aberdeen second half of this year. Labour want to shut the whole industry down what's the LibDem position ?
I'm not looking forward to having to put a pile of decent people out of work.
We want to keep the NE at the heart of the energy sector for decades to come. Oil and gas are absolutely at the heart of that, but we need a just transition into renewables to keep up there. What is a "just" transition? Not trying to turn the taps off as the SNP tried to do. Not going against renewables as the Tories tried to do.
Its both. I heat my house by oil remember, and make YouTube videos about my electric car. Just transition means that you can have both and convert dying gas fields into CCS and migrate jobs into the bonanza that is wind.
a reminder of what a windfall tax can do to North Sea revenues:
A reminder that Norway has been much more consistent in taxing its petroleum industry and has therefore succeeded in generating more taxation and more production.
And what a fantastic country it is in which to live or dwell.
Amongst the happiest people on earth, in the top two (the other being Finland)
Haviung worked there for 15 years I find some of the pointless authoritarianism rather trying. The massive restrictions on alcohol sales and the petty social planning restrictions which make our planning system look like a model of enlightenment and tolerence are symptomatic of the 'Janteloven' attitude.
It would be fair to say that these are, on balance, outweighed by the positives of the country but it is the fact that so many unecessary restrictions are put on people that is wearing.
Also, for countries that are the 'happiest on earth' they also have worryingly high suicide rates. Much higher than the UK for example.
This is winnable. Fewer fireworks up front but that’s ok if they keep going steady.
The election or the Euro football? We have won several elections in my lifetime we didn't seem like winning,and pretty consistently disappointed in the football since I was very young. But I'd think it is more likely that we will the football with a clean sheet in every game than we will win this election.
The thing that matters. The T20 World Cup game against the Aussies.
Well, there is because something can be saved from that.
But I'm now in a place where I wonder just how much more damage Sunak can do in the next 4 weeks.
He will certainly make more mistakes. I'd far rather take the risk of David Cameron playing nightwatchman now, to be honest.
Cameron can take over the campaign. He can, through some form of internal shenanigans, become leader of the Conservative Party. I have huge doubts as to whether he can become PM though, huge doubts. I don’t see how it works. So you’re running a campaign with no idea who will be PM if you win. How does that work unless you just admit defeat and say you want to be a strong opposition? I don’t get it.
Well, constitutionally there's nothing stopping a PM being from the Lords.
Understood. But what constitutional principle requires the King to appoint Cameron as opposed to, say, Angela Smith, Baroness Smith of Basildon, who is the leader of the Labour Party in the Lords? There’s nothing binding him to the choice of Cameron as no one has a Commons majority.
Most likely to command the confidence of the Commons. Since there are no MPs there is an argument to say that he could appoint Starmer. The next time the Commons meets, that's the likely outcome. I don't expect that would be the choice made, but it's possible. It would be a terrible bind for the king.
I don't think this is going to happen, but theoretically Sunak could announce that he's quitting as party leader, but will stay as caretaker PM until the election. That satisfies the constitution, the only difficulty being how internally to the conservative party they can make clear to the king now, who it is that would have the confidence of their parliamentary party after the election (in the unlikely event that they could obtain a plurality under such circumstances). Ordinarily the 1922 committee could meet to make a rule covering the case - but does it even exist during an election, since there are no MPs?
Cabinet select someone who HMK appoints until the Tories leadership election concludes then PM resigns in favour of new leader
In the unlikely event of the Tories winning, whowever is selected would remain as PM until the Tory leadership election, which they'd presumably be well-placed to win.
Yes, so the constitutional principle of making the most conservative choice in an emergency would therefore demand selection of someone who wouldn't stand in the subsequent leadership election.
Unfortunately for HMK, that still leaves Cameron, Dowden, or Hunt as potential choices.
For me, Dowden would be the best pick - Deputy PM (albeit purely a political title), likely to retain his seat in the election, very unlikely to stand in any leadership contest.
Well, there is because something can be saved from that.
But I'm now in a place where I wonder just how much more damage Sunak can do in the next 4 weeks.
He will certainly make more mistakes. I'd far rather take the risk of David Cameron playing nightwatchman now, to be honest.
Cameron can take over the campaign. He can, through some form of internal shenanigans, become leader of the Conservative Party. I have huge doubts as to whether he can become PM though, huge doubts. I don’t see how it works. So you’re running a campaign with no idea who will be PM if you win. How does that work unless you just admit defeat and say you want to be a strong opposition? I don’t get it.
He can't become leader of the party.
Conservative Party Constitution, part iii section 10:
There shall be a Leader of the Party (referred to in this Constitution as “the Leader”) drawn from those elected to the House of Commons
And because Lord Cameron cannot become leader of the Conservative Party, he cannot be Prime Minister.
Oliver Dowden is deputy PM so if Rishi were to fall under a bus, it would probably be he who takes over.
It is true that under the current party rules Cameron can't be leader. It is much more doubtful that he cannot be PM (constitutionally that is. not WRT the current election); there is a clear and long convention that he can't, strengthened a bit by the events of 1963, but there is no clear and absolute bar to it. Normally the king calls for the leader of the relevant party, but if that leader asked the king to call for Lord Backwoodsman instead then I think he would do so.
For that to happen there would have to be some sort of emergency; that is exactly when the rules and conventions develop. (PS The king is going to cal for SKS and not Lord Emsworth.)
The government continues; ministers continue to draw their stipend; the King would not call for SKS before the election but for Oliver Dowden. Or if Rishi were only injured by the bus, he would remain PM. There is no imaginable mechanism for David Cameron to take over.
A Whitehall source said Cameron was “apoplectic” about Sunak’s decision but, when asked why he had not “picked Sunak up by his lapels”, he said: “There is only so much I can do.”
There was also fury at Buckingham Palace, where courtiers pointed out that the King, who is being treated for cancer, was advised not to travel but was determined to do so, despite being in pain. Advertisement
While the Tories are this weekend engaged in a circular firing squad to identify who to blame, the truth is, as one insider put it, everyone’s hands are covered in blood. The issue of what to do was debated in the three-day look-ahead meeting in Conservative Campaign Headquarters (CCHQ) at 1pm on Monday at which all Sunak’s key aides were present, including Isaac Levido, his campaign director, Liam Booth-Smith, the Downing Street chief of staff, and James Forsyth, his political secretary.
The fact that the King did what was required of him, when he actually had a reasonable excuse to leave it to the Prince of Wales, is not much remarked upon but only serves to make cut-and-run Rishi look even worse.
Not so much a matter of what were they thinking, but were they actually thinking at all?
And yet...if the King really is much more poorly than is admitted, it may be that Sunak - taken into confidence of this - decided the election needed to be got out the way sooner rather than later.
Why are we discussing Sunak standing down with a little over 3 weeks left?
This too is utter madness. It is NOT going to happen!
I have just responded to Farooq saying "not going to happen" by talking up a scenario where it already is. In this scenario, I seek clarification as to what Sunak is resigning from.
Sunak is not an MP - cannot resign from that. Sunak is Prime Minister - appointed by the King - and party leader - appointed by Mrs Brady.
So, which of the remaining two is he resigning from? PM? Can't - we have to have a government, and I think the King and the establishment will simply refuse to accept his resignation in this circumstance.
Which leaves resigning as party leader. That would not affect him being PM. And allows the party to select someone else and that someone else could be invited to serve as PM. Though in reality would Sunak - who does not need to command a majority - not just stay as caretaker PM?
So he *could* resign the leadership. In shame. But as the party would surely largely disappear at the election what would it matter who was selected?
You do all realise, don’t you, that in 1997 the Labour leads were almost comparable to this time at this stage? The difference was a few more in the mid teens. They didn’t narrow until two weeks out and then, in the real deal, it wound up at 12.5%
Are you sure we’re not all overdoing this? That in fact this will be closer to the 1997 result? Corollary, the RefUK ‘surge’ is about as real as the YouthQuake?
We are overdoing it. All this talk of zero seats for the Tories is madness. Total madness. Even the idea of the Tories slipping into third is fun as a joke but it's not going to happen.
"Yes. But what if we could?"
The momentum is going *against* the Tories, and they are already in this hell hole. To finish 3rd the Tories would have to utterly haemorrhage votes in all directions. And they are. And have RefUK radically disrupt their vote. Which shows plenty signs of happening.
Think of it. Tactical voting to 1997 levels. A punishment beating to end all punishment beatings. Combined with RefUK taking a critical chunk of their vote - just enough votes in just enough seats to hand another score or two over to opposition parties. As Brexit Party candidates did in 2019.
There is an unlikely but plausible scenario in which Ed Davey ends up as LOTO with a tenth of the popular vote.
But most likely the Tories hold on to enough of their core vote to remain viable. As always, FPTP imposes a ceiling on the support for challenger parties, because of the wasted vote problem. We still have to assume that a lot of the Reform support will trudge back because they haven't the concentration of support to stand a chance of actually winning in all, or very nearly all, constituencies.
Well, there is because something can be saved from that.
But I'm now in a place where I wonder just how much more damage Sunak can do in the next 4 weeks.
He will certainly make more mistakes. I'd far rather take the risk of David Cameron playing nightwatchman now, to be honest.
Cameron can take over the campaign. He can, through some form of internal shenanigans, become leader of the Conservative Party. I have huge doubts as to whether he can become PM though, huge doubts. I don’t see how it works. So you’re running a campaign with no idea who will be PM if you win. How does that work unless you just admit defeat and say you want to be a strong opposition? I don’t get it.
He can't become leader of the party.
Conservative Party Constitution, part iii section 10:
There shall be a Leader of the Party (referred to in this Constitution as “the Leader”) drawn from those elected to the House of Commons
And because Lord Cameron cannot become leader of the Conservative Party, he cannot be Prime Minister.
Oliver Dowden is deputy PM so if Rishi were to fall under a bus, it would probably be he who takes over.
But, right now, no-one is elected to the Commons.
Yes, but the government is still the government, and the Prime Minister remains Prime Minister until he resigns, a few minutes before his successor is appointed.
If Sunak resigned as PM the King would take his advice on his successor which, given there's a Tory government already in place as the King's ministers, would be a Tory until such time as the lay of the land of the new HoC was clear post election.
Whereupon another resignation and appointment might take place.
Constitutionally it is not a “Tory” Government. That’s a convenient shorthand based on the fact that prime ministers are appointed based on their ability to command confidence in the House of Commons. The label we attached, for convenience, to that majority in the recent Parliament was the “Conservative” or “Tory” party. At the moment the PM is in place as a result of the outcome of the last election. There is no mechanism or precedent for a party that does not (by definition) command such confidence.
The Monarch’s role in appointing a prime minister is one of the remaining prerogative powers. The majority of those powers are exercised on his behalf by ministers, but the power to appoint prime ministers remains with the King. In the absence of any majority in the Commons, or any members of the Commons, appointing a member of one party over any other would be a nakedly political decision taken, as you accept, during an election campaign for the benefit of one party. The late Queen would never have done that and I sure as hell hope the current King wouldn’t either.
If Sunak resigned as PM all bets are off until the election. Charles may fancy doing it himself for a few weeks.
No, the Monarch would take the least contentious decision which would be to appoint a member of the existing administration and not create a change where no mandate existed.
If a new HoC was elected that was different he would no longer have its confidence, so would resign, just as Sunak would have done in a month's time anyway.
No way. The King appointing a PM nominated to help the Tories win votes DURING an election campaign? Least contentious? That’s as contentious as it comes, it could kill the both Tory Party and the Monarchy as institutions.
If it won votes then by definition it has some degree of legitimacy
Why are we discussing Sunak standing down with a little over 3 weeks left?
This too is utter madness. It is NOT going to happen!
I have just responded to Farooq saying "not going to happen" by talking up a scenario where it already is. In this scenario, I seek clarification as to what Sunak is resigning from.
Sunak is not an MP - cannot resign from that. Sunak is Prime Minister - appointed by the King - and party leader - appointed by Mrs Brady.
So, which of the remaining two is he resigning from? PM? Can't - we have to have a government, and I think the King and the establishment will simply refuse to accept his resignation in this circumstance.
Which leaves resigning as party leader. That would not affect him being PM. And allows the party to select someone else and that someone else could be invited to serve as PM. Though in reality would Sunak - who does not need to command a majority - not just stay as caretaker PM?
So he *could* resign the leadership. In shame. But as the party would surely largely disappear at the election what would it matter who was selected?
Which is why it won't happen.
Who would he send his resignation to? No 1922 Committee at the moment, so no Chairman of it.
I started reading the sentence assuming it would end with “years”, and was already to say “blimey that was quick”. And then it was “days”… Madness.
The article does not say sentenced (at least now), it says remanded in custody:
COPENHAGEN, June 8 (Reuters) - A 39-year old Polish man was remanded in custody for 12 days on Saturday over an assault the previous day on Danish Prime Minister Mette Frederiksen, which authorities said caused her to suffer a minor neck injury.
Comments
Same principles apply.
You do all realise, don’t you, that in 1997 the Labour leads were almost comparable to 2024 at the same stage? The difference was a few more in the mid teens. They didn’t narrow until two weeks out and then, in the real deal, it wound up at 12.5%
Are you sure we’re not all overdoing this? That in fact this will be closer to the 1997 result? Corollary, the RefUK ‘surge’ is about as real as the YouthQuake?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Opinion_polling_for_the_1997_United_Kingdom_general_election
Sunak definitely should have ennobled Farage!
🚨 Our latest polling with
@ObserverUK
The Labour lead is now 18 points
· Labour 42% (-3)
· Conservatives 24% (-1)
· Lib Dems 10% (+2)
· SNP 3% (n/c)
· Greens 7% (+1)
· Reform 12% (+1)
Fieldwork: 5 - 7 June.
Changes from 29 - 31 May.
Not so much a matter of what were they thinking, but were they actually thinking at all?
The important thing is Tory share = votes. Low share means low votes means bloody ‘ell
Watch the Tory share in all polls, not gaps.
A very good time to buy
But what it really looks like is the two blocks shuffling beach towels on sun loungers.
The Monarch’s role in appointing a prime minister is one of the remaining prerogative powers. The majority of those powers are exercised on his behalf by ministers, but the power to appoint prime ministers remains with the King. In the absence of any majority in the Commons, or any members of the Commons, appointing a member of one party over any other would be a nakedly political decision taken, as you accept, during an election campaign for the benefit of one party. The late Queen would never have done that and I sure as hell hope the current King wouldn’t either.
If Sunak resigned as PM all bets are off until the election. Charles may fancy doing it himself for a few weeks.
(No I don't really believe that, though I know people who would).
Election campaigns are more fun if you allow yourself to get carried away and overdo it anyway. So long as you don't base your betting position on it!
He could in principle appoint who he likes, but there are lots of things he could do in principle but doesn't. That's how a constitutional monarchy works.
The royals are making a play, watch out.
The Labour Deputy has their own mandate in the Party is makes sense as the “PM hit by bus” first reserve. However it varies a bit for the Tories. Staying recent, did they “mean” it:
- Hesletine? Yes.
- Hague? Yes.
- Osborne? Yes.
- Lidington? Maybe..
- Green? No.
- Raab? Well he was so we have to say yes, but…
- Dowden? LOL
I don't think this is going to happen, but theoretically Sunak could announce that he's quitting as party leader, but will stay as caretaker PM until the election.
That satisfies the constitution, the only difficulty being how internally to the conservative party they can make clear to the king now, who it is that would have the confidence of their parliamentary party after the election (in the unlikely event that they could obtain a plurality under such circumstances). Ordinarily the 1922 committee could meet to make a rule covering the case - but does it even exist during an election, since there are no MPs?
The poor thing is so vulnerable but as advised by the RSPB it is one of those things and the parents will protect and feed the chick, though we do have foxes at night as evidenced on our security cameras so as the RSPB said ultimately it is natural selection
This has been going on since late morning and the parents are vicious to anyone approaching the wee creature and it is genuinely amazing to watch the parents as they protect and feed their little one
Unfortunately it is constant noise from the parents which I expect to continue as long as the chick survives
Just telling this story as nature continues, no matter the chaos in politics
However, if he *did*, or became seriously incapacitated, my money would be on the King asking the Cabinet to nominate one of its number.
1. In the absence of the Commons, the caretaker govt is the best he has for constitutionally/democratically-legitimate advice.
2. The cabinet are all Privy Counsellors, who have an added layer of supra-party legit. (Though I guess he might check in with Starmer and Davey for added protection)
3. Not an expert, but seems to me there’s a strong presumption when Royals actually have to make a decision, to favour the status quo ante.
This too is utter madness. It is NOT going to happen!
If Sunak were to pass away as you suggest, while it’s never been done, I think few would object to Oliver Dowden, as deputy PM, stepping in for the interim. It’s not perfect but it’s a necessity, CR’s scenario is all about helping the Tories.
If a new HoC was elected that was different he would no longer have its confidence, so would resign, just as Sunak would have done in a month's time anyway.
"Vote Starmer you know what you're getting, vote Tory and get who knows?"
It really is not tenable to dump a leader in favour of an unknown in mid campaign. There lies the Tory party imploding completely.
For that to happen there would have to be some sort of emergency; that is exactly when the rules and conventions develop. (PS The king is going to cal for SKS and not Lord Emsworth.)
So, presumably this has left other chicks on the roof? Are the parents going back and forth from driveway to roof?
As an aside, seagulls are not everyone’s favourite bird but as you know they’re protected so no one is allowed to harm them, including their nests.
It wasn't the same without you. I mean that upstart demi-Yank Smithson Junior tried his best but he wasn't really up to the task
The harm is be trying to avoid is the act of elevating Dowden being seen to change the result as people flocked to him partly as “the King’s man” (stop sniggering at the back).
As we’ve all said - this is a thought experiment only.
The over 65s don't like the sound of the end of the NHS as proposed by Farage.
The momentum is going *against* the Tories, and they are already in this hell hole. To finish 3rd the Tories would have to utterly haemorrhage votes in all directions. And they are. And have RefUK radically disrupt their vote. Which shows plenty signs of happening.
Think of it. Tactical voting to 1997 levels. A punishment beating to end all punishment beatings. Combined with RefUK taking a critical chunk of their vote - just enough votes in just enough seats to hand another score or two over to opposition parties. As Brexit Party candidates did in 2019.
Certainly possible.
It is not only seagulls who are protected, all nesting birds are and it is a very serious offence to disturb birds creating their nests, removing the nest, or damaging or removing birds eggs
Generally you cannot remove a seagull's or pigeon's nest between the 1st March and 31st October
But more seriously his idiotic advisers
It's crazy talk though, even the Tories are not stupid enough to have a leadership contest dominate the rest of the campaign.
I thought they were more PCP with Crystal Meth?
I am ok, I just have to have to avoid strenuous physical activity for around three months whilst I heal as the abscess was large and deep.
I happen to favour a single, centrally run, state controlled monolith funded by taxation (I.e. fold up all the Trusts etc.); but I should have to defend that view and various European insurance based models do work (I think they work better, when they do work better, only because more cash is spent, and my model would spend it most efficiently and equally).
But we are children so we never discuss it.
Broken, sleazy Labour and Tories on the slide!
It would be fair to say that these are, on balance, outweighed by the positives of the country but it is the fact that so many unecessary restrictions are put on people that is wearing.
Also, for countries that are the 'happiest on earth' they also have worryingly high suicide rates. Much higher than the UK for example.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pbff8T-IpPc
Around 30 could come off the last two overs, which means England just going at 10s for next 10.
I have England favourites from here.
Unfortunately for HMK, that still leaves Cameron, Dowden, or Hunt as potential choices.
For me, Dowden would be the best pick - Deputy PM (albeit purely a political title), likely to retain his seat in the election, very unlikely to stand in any leadership contest.
It is certainly possible.
Sunak is not an MP - cannot resign from that. Sunak is Prime Minister - appointed by the King - and party leader - appointed by Mrs Brady.
So, which of the remaining two is he resigning from? PM? Can't - we have to have a government, and I think the King and the establishment will simply refuse to accept his resignation in this circumstance.
Which leaves resigning as party leader. That would not affect him being PM. And allows the party to select someone else and that someone else could be invited to serve as PM. Though in reality would Sunak - who does not need to command a majority - not just stay as caretaker PM?
So he *could* resign the leadership. In shame. But as the party would surely largely disappear at the election what would it matter who was selected?
Which is why it won't happen.
But most likely the Tories hold on to enough of their core vote to remain viable. As always, FPTP imposes a ceiling on the support for challenger parties, because of the wasted vote problem. We still have to assume that a lot of the Reform support will trudge back because they haven't the concentration of support to stand a chance of actually winning in all, or very nearly all, constituencies.
COPENHAGEN, June 8 (Reuters) - A 39-year old Polish man was remanded in custody for 12 days on Saturday over an assault the previous day on Danish Prime Minister Mette Frederiksen, which authorities said caused her to suffer a minor neck injury.