Lords becoming PM

#1
If somebody from the Lords becomes PM how are they held to account? Am I correct in thinking that they would be unable to sit in the commons and as such we wouldn't see things like PMQs? Or do they have a commons representative who will speak on their behalf?

Obviously with Cyclops on his way out I am having nightmares of Lord Rumba of Rio taking over.
 
#2
Convention dictates that PMs must come from the commons, although not legally binding the precedent from conventions are very strong therefore i highly doubt this convention will be broken. So you can sleep easy that Lord Rumba wont be heading the government :wink:
 
#3
Lords can't address the Commons, this is one reason Churchill became PM- the only competitor, Lord Halifax IIRC, felt that he couldn't lead properly without being able to do this.

A Lord can be PM, but the senior Govt Minister in the Commons would take PMQs- although it may be called something else.
 
#4
The last Peer to be PM was Lord Salisbury..

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robert_Gascoyne-Cecil,_3rd_Marquess_of_Salisbury

most of his cabinet were peers as well...

I am no expert in Parlimentary procedure, however the parliamentary Labour party in the commons would have to be:

a. In a majority
b. Happy to allow the government focus to shift to the house of Peers...

... neither of which I would hope is likely :roll:

Anyway, all the labour BBs hate Mandy which is why he is where he is..
 
#5
HE117 said:
Anyway, all the labour BBs hate Mandy which is why he is where he is..
everyone hates him :lol:
 
#6
In practice it is possible for a Peer to become PM although this hasn't happened for a very long time.
This is why we still have the position of 'Leader of the house' who would represent the PM at question time and in debate.
 

Sixty

ADC
Moderator
Book Reviewer
#7
Magdovus said:
Lords can't address the Commons, this is one reason Churchill became PM- the only competitor, Lord Halifax IIRC, felt that he couldn't lead properly without being able to do this.

A Lord can be PM, but the senior Govt Minister in the Commons would take PMQs- although it may be called something else.

See also Alec Douglas-Home who was a member of the Lords when he was asked to be PM. Renounced his title and fought a by-election to join the Commons.
 

Mr_Fingerz

LE
Book Reviewer
#8
Presumably, to follow convention, a Peer would have to do a "Stansgate" and revoke the Peerage (i.e. go from Lord Stansgate to Anthony Wedgewood-Benn, to Tony Benn), do the time in the Commons as PM, and then pray that they get kicked back upstairs in the first "list" after their retirement (after all it would be bad form for them to nominate themselves on their own retirement).

The Prime Minister's actual office (IIRC) is First Lord of The Admiralty. So, s/he would probably nominate a First Chief Petty Officer of The Admiralty to answer questions on his/her behalf.
 
#9
Mr_Fingerz said:
Presumably, to follow convention, a Peer would have to do a "Stansgate" and revoke the Peerage (i.e. go from Lord Stansgate to Anthony Wedgewood-Benn, to Tony Benn), do the time in the Commons as PM, and then pray that they get kicked back upstairs in the first "list" after their retirement (after all it would be bad form for them to nominate themselves on their own retirement).

The Prime Minister's actual office (IIRC) is First Lord of The Admiralty. So, s/he would probably nominate a First Chief Petty Officer of The Admiralty to answer questions on his/her behalf.
Errr, fairly sure it's First Lord of the Treasury...
 

Mr_Fingerz

LE
Book Reviewer
#10
You're very probably right.








Thanx for negating the comic effect.....
 
#11
McMong said:
HE117 said:
Anyway, all the labour BBs hate Mandy which is why he is where he is..
everyone hates him :lol:
I think he's quite popular in Brazilian Houseboy circles.






What a foul image.
 
#12
Mr_Fingerz said:
You're very probably right.








Thanx for negating the comic effect.....
Oh I don't know. Having Darling as his representative surely has some comedic merit :wink:
 
#13
Oooh what a good idea. Award St Tony a peerage & the Dear Leader can come back to take care of us in perpetuity.

In fact why not make them ALL peers to continue the Project?
 
#14
Social_Handgrenade said:
Mr_Fingerz said:
You're very probably right.








Thanx for negating the comic effect.....
Oh I don't know. Having Darling as his representative surely has some comedic merit :wink:
You are right - First Lord of the Admiralty was the civilian minister responsible for the Navy after 1806 (prior to that it could have been a naval officer). Thus the rise of the title First Sea Lord to distinguish the professional head of the Navy from his civilian counterpart. Once the Board of Admiralty was abolished in the 60s the First Lord went with it. 1SL and 2SL remain.
 
#16
Jaisus fück! First there was Mad Maggie who went bananas on her power and broke laws, then there was Major who proved to be a minor and only interested in what he could scam out of the scheme. Then there was Phony Tony, nuff sed! And now there's Brown the Anointed, who's managed, all on his lonesome, to ground Blighty into the ground.

That's just the recent history. Has nobody noticed that life under these berks has never, ever actually got easier for the majority of the populace?

The time for an entirely new approach in Blighty is nigh, and it doesn't include the tired old parties that have perpetuated the nightmare to date.

MsG
 
#17
Bugsy said:
Jaisus fück! First there was Mad Maggie who went bananas on her power and broke laws, then there was Major who proved to be a minor and only interested in what he could scam out of the scheme. Then there was Phony Tony, nuff sed! And now there's Brown the Anointed, who's managed, all on his lonesome, to ground Blighty into the ground.

That's just the recent history. Has nobody noticed that life under these berks has never, ever actually got easier for the majority of the populace?

The time for an entirely new approach in Blighty is nigh, and it doesn't include the tired old parties that have perpetuated the nightmare to date.

MsG
Interestingly I caught a snippet of radio the other day where someone was describing how dictatorships are born, if not out of a coup.
I think he was describing Mugabe's rise to power but I'm not certain.
Firstly the party sweeps to power with an enormous popular mandate and is by far the most popular party of many (this was upon independence). The euphoria lasts a number of years and the majority is so overwhelming that the ruling party virtually has carte blanche to do as it pleases. As time wears on the populace begins to tire of a government who increasingly appear more interested in their own wealth and comfort that that of the population they serve. They seek to ensure that the leaders friends and trusted ones are placed in strategic positions, anyone who doesn't tow the line is cast out of the party those who are trusted will survive any scandal because they have the protective arm of the leader around them. Opposition parties begin to develop but the ruling party has had it so good for so long and with no real opposition to curb them that they believe that they know what is right and what is best for their country. They increasingly seek to curb the individual freedom of the populace to make it easier to control political opinion and will. They seek to control the media and manipulate them to ensure that the government message is carried by all. Next comes the stage where their excesses are so open, so obvious to the majority that the opposition parties are beginning to unite in their condemnation. This is when the government begins to discredit certain opposition politicians, particularly those they see as a current or future threat. Arrests are made over incidents that would have hitherto been normal political practice, such as leaking government bad news. Eventually government, through its now, state controlled, media enters into a propaganda campaign against the official opposition. Eventually we have 'staged' insurgencies or 'terrorist' activities which need a 'state of emergency' to control and so what was once a hugely popular, democratically elected political figure becomes a dictator.
Draw your own parallels, it's not hard to do.
 
#18
Luckily, Gordon's not competent to run a dictatorship, even if he becomes a Peer. All the people who were competent to be in a dictatorship bailed out with Saint Tony of Sedgefield. Alastair Campbell hasn't stopped laughing since Damian McBride made such a pig's ear of trying to be PM's spin doctor.

I think we do need to worry about keeping Gordon's underpants off his head and his pencils out of his nostrils. His Messianic ego has taken a hammering as his dreams of the past 20 years have crumbled in under twelve months. His already fragile mental state is giving cause for concern and it's reported that he's started physically assaulting staff who bring him bad news. Dave has told the Tories to lay off him a bit in case he resigns and somebody better replaces him. Suddenly all those spoof 'Downfall' mashups aren't funny any more.

If he flips his lid, anything could happen. He could appoint himself to the Lords before the election if he thinks he might lose his seat in the Commons. He could even try the old Civil Contingencies Act/State of Emergency wheeze. That would allow him to rule by decree and overrule anything that stands in his way. No problem sitting in the Lords and being PM then.
 
#19
A Westminster insider writes...

Yes indeed it is possible for a lord to be PM but it would be wrong to have as prime minister, a man who had not put his agenda, personality and abilities in front of the electorate for their approval...isn't that right Gordon?...Gordon??
 

Similar threads