Electing a Leader

2020 ◽  
pp. 89-112
Author(s):  
Rodney Brazier
Keyword(s):  
Political Parties ◽  
Prime Minister ◽  
Formal System ◽  
Conservative Party ◽  
General Election ◽  
Opposition Party ◽  
Leadership Elections ◽  
The Government ◽  
Jeremy Corbyn ◽  
Theresa May

A person normally becomes Prime Minister either after winning a General Election, or after the Government party has elected a new leader to succeed a Prime Minister. Leadership of one of the main political parties is therefore a prerequisite for entering Number 10 Downing Street. This chapter examines exactly how the main parties have elected their leaders since 1902, setting the processes in their historical contexts, and explaining why the systems have been changed down the years. The Conservative Party did not have a formal system until after a major crisis in 1963; Labour has always elected its leader; but the systems which have been used have been altered for political reasons. Recent leadership elections, e.g. of Theresa May, Boris Johnson, and Jeremy Corbyn, are examined. The chapter also explains the ways in which an opposition party can get rid of a leader who doesn’t want to quit.

UK election will complicate Brexit process

2017 ◽  
Keyword(s):  
Prime Minister ◽  
Conservative Party ◽  
Labour Party ◽  
General Election ◽  
National Party ◽  
Content Type ◽  
Modest Increase ◽  
Scottish National Party ◽  
The Uk ◽  
Theresa May

Significance The result is a stunning setback for Prime Minister Theresa May. The Conservative Party secured a notably larger share of the vote, but it was outpaced by the Labour Party, which achieved a much larger increase. The Scottish National Party (SNP) suffered substantial losses to both the Conservatives (which had been expected) and to Labour (which had not). The Liberal Democrats managed only a modest increase in their representation. Impacts If Sinn Fein once more refuses to take its seats at Westminster, a Conservative-DUP accord would command a slim but not unstable majority. If May survives she will be much less dominant and have to adopt a more collegial style. In different circumstances, the obvious solution might be a second general election in relatively short order. With the UK economy showing signs of slowing, however, the Conservative Party may be reluctant to risk that option.

The Brexit Elections, 2017–19

2021 ◽  
pp. 189-239
Author(s):  
David Denver ◽  
Mark Garnett
Keyword(s):  
Prime Minister ◽  
Party Competition ◽  
General Election ◽  
Left Wing ◽  
David Cameron ◽  
Uk Government ◽  
The Uk ◽  
Jeremy Corbyn ◽  
Theresa May ◽  
The Eu

The years immediately after the 2015 general election were dominated by another vote, held in 2016. In 2013, the electoral challenge from UKIP had forced David Cameron to promise an in–out referendum on the EU should his party win the next general election. Cameron fulfilled his promise, after negotiations with the EU which only partially addressed the grievances of Eurosceptics in UKIP and within his own party. The chapter discusses the narrow victory for ‘Leave’ in the 2016 referendum, arising from divisions within the UK which cut across previous party allegiances and introduced a new element of volatility in an electorate which was already barely recognizable from that of 1964. The situation was complicated further by the election of the radical left-wing MP Jeremy Corbyn as Labour leader after his party’s 2015 defeat. By contrast, when David Cameron resigned as Conservative leader and Prime Minister after the referendum he was succeeded by Theresa May, who was regarded as a pragmatic centre-right politician who could negotiate a compromise ‘Brexit’ deal with the EU. The chapter examines May’s failure to carry out this promise, marked in particular by her inept attempt to secure a convincing parliamentary majority in the 2017 general election. When May was forced from office in 2019 she was succeeded by Boris Johnson, a far more controversial and divisive character who nevertheless was able to lead the Conservatives to a comfortable electoral victory, not least because their pro-European opponents were hopelessly divided. However, the victorious Conservatives had no reason to feel complacent; even if Johnson’s government could deliver the favourable Brexit deal which it had promised, over the years since 1964 the British electorate had become far more fickle and parties were increasingly vulnerable to events outside their control. Within a few months of the 2019 election, party competition in Britain, which had seemed so stable back in 1964, was exposed to a new and deadly source of disturbance—the outbreak in China of the Covid-19 virus—which presented the most serious challenge faced by any UK government since 1945.

A coalition of chaos

2018 ◽  
pp. 190-211
Author(s):  
Rosie Campbell
Keyword(s):  
Party System ◽  
Prime Minister ◽  
General Election ◽  
The Other ◽  
Minority Government ◽  
The Government ◽  
Theresa May

This chapter takes stock of the post-election landscape. It describes how the Conservatives and Prime Minister Theresa May emerged from the 2017 general election as a minority government and negotiated a confidence-and-supply arrangement with Northern Ireland’s Democratic Unionist Party (DUP). It considers how the government might be affected by the twin challenges of austerity and Brexit, as well as the other major parties. It finishes by examining the electoral instability in the party system and the possible implications going forward.

Epilogue: ‘Mummy Maybot’: a new age of authoritarian neoliberalism

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Tracey Jensen
Keyword(s):  
Popular Culture ◽  
Social Security ◽  
Welfare State ◽  
Prime Minister ◽  
New Age ◽  
Individual Responsibility ◽  
Liberal Feminism ◽  
The Government ◽  
Policy Discussion ◽  
Theresa May

This book has examined the good parenting scripts emerging from popular culture, policy discussion, public debate and across media, and how these scripts have championed affluent, ambitious and aspirational maternity in particular, and created and sustained a vocabulary of ‘individual responsibility’ and ‘hardworking families’. It has also discussed how neoliberalism co-opted liberal feminism and has highlighted increasingly unsympathetic and lurid portrayals of poverty, as well as the rising resentments over social security that they animate. This epilogue discusses the rise of a new trans-Atlantic age of neoliberal authoritarianism in Britain under the government of Prime Minister Theresa May, focusing in particular on her early commitments to ‘just about managing’ families (JAMs) and her initiatives aimed at containing resentments about austerity and the crushing material privations caused by the retrenchment of the welfare state.

scholarly journals Prospective Model in Public Policy for a Democratic and Equitable Election of Regional Leaders

2020 ◽  
Vol 8 (1) ◽  
pp. 1-9
Author(s):  
Suparnyo Suparnyo
Keyword(s):  
Political Parties ◽  
Secondary Data ◽  
General Election ◽  
Weak Support ◽  
The People ◽  
The Future ◽  
The Government ◽  
Regional Leaders ◽  
Election Commission ◽  
Prospective Model

The election of regional leaders conducted directly by the community is believed to result in a democratic government. The formed government is expected to be more open, more responsive, and to carry out the aspirations of the people so that it can realize a government that comes from the people, by the people, and for the people. A person can nominate him/herself as a candidate for Regent or Deputy Regent if supported by some residents, by Political Parties or Combined Political Parties. The relatively weak support of the population or political parties or combined political parties has resulted in very few candidates for regent or deputy regent, even only one pair of candidates can occur as in Pati Regency. The study aims to know how the policy in the future (Prospective Model) should be taken so that the single-candidate for Regent or Deputy Regent in a general election does not happen. By using a sociological juridical approach, collecting primary and secondary data, processing and analyzing data, the objective of the study can be reached.The policy that needs to be taken by the government so that in the future there will be no single candidate is by giving obligations to political parties to conduct cadre recruitment to become candidates for regional leaders. Besides, the General Election Commission needs to make a scheme that is easier and more flexible for individual candidates regarding administrative requirements, procedures, and mechanisms for gathering support, and there needs to be a new policy so that the potential for a single-candidate can be eliminated or not occur.

Gambling with the electorate

2018 ◽  
pp. 1-33
Author(s):  
Nicholas Allen
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
Prime Minister ◽  
Conservative Party ◽  
The European Union ◽  
David Cameron ◽  
Prime Ministers ◽  
Eu Membership ◽  
Theresa May

This chapter charts the story of the Conservatives in government between 2015 and 2017. It examines why David Cameron called a referendum on Britain’s membership of the European Union, why Theresa May succeeded him as prime minister, and why May decided to call a snap election in the spring of 2017. It locates these decisions against deep and bitter divisions within the Conservative party over the issue of EU membership, and further examines the broader record of the Conservatives in government. Above all, it seeks to explain how both prime ministers both came to gamble their fortunes on the electorate – and lose.

Good Result or Bad Deal?

2020 ◽  
pp. 83-108
Author(s):  
Stephen Wall
Keyword(s):  
Prime Minister ◽  
Conservative Party ◽  
Labour Party ◽  
General Election ◽  
Party Voting ◽  
The Uk ◽  
Enoch Powell

Poised to begin negotiations for EEC accession, Prime Minister Wilson called a snap general election and lost to Edward Heath’s Conservative Party. Heath was a life-long pro-European but there were opponents of EEC entry, led by the disgraced rebel, Enoch Powell, within Tory ranks. The Conservatives adopted the Labour government’s accession strategy. But, out of government, the Labour Party turned against membership. Pro-EEC Labour rebels, led by former Chancellor of the Exchequer Roy Jenkins, voted with Heath to secure parliamentary approval for accession. To prevent the Labour Party voting to take the UK out of the EEC, Wilson promised that he would renegotiate the terms agreed by Heath and put them to the electorate. The EEC countries, especially France, struck a hard deal with the UK and Heath was obliged to accept disadvantageous terms for UK accession.

The Conservative Party and the Formation of the National Government: August 1931

1986 ◽  
Vol 29 (1) ◽  
pp. 159-182 ◽  
Author(s):  
Stuart Ball
Keyword(s):  
Prime Minister ◽  
Conservative Party ◽  
National Government ◽  
General Election ◽  
British History ◽  
Political Crisis ◽  
Liberal Party ◽  
Labour Government ◽  
Intrinsic Interest

On 24 August 1931 the prime minister, Ramsay MacDonald, tendered the resignation of the second Labour government. In its place he became the premier of an all-party ‘National’ cabinet. This included both the leader of the Conservative party, Stanley Baldwin, and the acting-leader of the Liberal party, Sir Herbert Samuel, together with a number of their senior colleagues. This temporary emergency administration went on to win a landslide majority in the general election of October 1931, and to govern for the ensuing decade. The crisis which created the National government has proved to be of enduring fascination, as a result of its intrinsic interest as the major political crisis of the inter-war period and its profound consequences for subsequent British history. However, historical attention has been principally focused upon the problems of the Labour government, the decisions of Ramsay MacDonald, and the contribution of King George V. As a result the role of the Conservative party – often portrayed as having been the sole benefactor from these events – has been either neglected for its supposed passivity or misunderstood in its mood and intention.

Tunisia’s democratic transition will struggle

2017 ◽  
Keyword(s):  
Political Parties ◽  
Democratic Transition ◽  
Prime Minister ◽  
Public Spending ◽  
Structural Reforms ◽  
Political Leaders ◽  
Content Type ◽  
Arab Uprisings ◽  
The Government

Significance This follows former Prime Minister Mehdi Jomaa’s announcement on March 29 of a new, non-ideological party that includes technocrats and former ministers -- the Alternative Party. Six years after the 2011 Arab uprisings, Tunisian politics is still in flux -- facing serious social and economic challenges. Impacts Protests and industrial strikes will continue in the months ahead as the government tries to reduce public spending. Political parties are losing the trust of the population. Further cabinet reshuffles are likely, but political leaders are wary of making bold structural reforms.

The 1846 Repeal of the Corn Laws: Insights from a Classification Tree Approach

2014 ◽  
Vol 8 (2) ◽  
pp. 187-203
Author(s):  
Stephen Peplow
Keyword(s):  
Prime Minister ◽  
Classification Tree ◽  
Principal Component ◽  
Conservative Party ◽  
The Subject ◽  
Corn Laws ◽  
The Government ◽  
Formed Part ◽  
First Time ◽  
Tree Approach

Prime Minister Robert Peel was forced to resign in 1846 over the Repeal of the Corn Laws. Far from being a relatively unimportant piece of agricultural legislation, the Corn Laws, and their continuance, formed part of the ideology of the Conservative Party of the time. By proposing to Repeal the Corn Laws, Sir Robert was attacking the beliefs on which his party had won victory in the 1841 General Election. The result was a serious split within the Conservative Party over the Corn Laws. The majority of Conservatives voted against their own government, while 114 ‘Peelite’ Conservatives voted with Peel and the government. Why those particular Conservative Members decided to split away from their colleagues has been the subject of a large amount of research, mostly with ‘demand-side’ models which assume that the MP is little more than a mouthpiece for constituency interests. Peel's 1845 motion, a year before Repeal, to increase the yearly grant to the Irish Catholic seminary at Maynooth created very large controversy, and a backbench rebellion in which half of his own party voted against the government. As with Repeal, Maynooth passed only because the Opposition party decided to side with the government. This article uses principal component analysis and a classification tree analysis for the first time to show that while Conservative Members were voting with constituency interests in mind, their previous voting record over Maynooth is an overlooked and important predictor.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document