Does this refer to the soon-to-leave-office David Cameron who is the current PM, or is it somebody else?
David Cameron
David Cameron
Does this refer to the soon-to-leave-office David Cameron who is the current PM, or is it somebody else?
-
Icey
Re: David Cameron
No, it's the very same Yogi, just as it's true that Boris Johnson's from Royal lineage as well. The two're 8th cousins, and both descend down the line from George 2nd. However back in the 1600's, you'll see that one of George's children (he had 14 or 15 of them!) had a long affair with an Irish actress. FitzCarence was the sur- name given to their child, Elizabeth, and also to her 9 siblings, but Elizabeth married the Earl of Erroll, and she was the great grandmother ( a few times removed) of David Cameron . Both're related to the Queen, and both ambitious men went to the same school as each other. Both wanted to be Prime Minister, and for all we know, both might end up having fulfilled that ambition! Talk about "keep it in the family" .... but it comes as no surprise.
Re: David Cameron
"we are famileeee, my brothers and sisters and meeeee..."-
Icey
Re: David Cameron
Don't they just! LOL! Wouldn't surprise me if half of Eton were related! : )
Re: David Cameron
Sooo ... let me see if I have this right. The people of England do not vote anyone into the office of Prime Minister (PM). They do vote for MP's who in turn select somebody to lead their party, and the country. The question I have is, "Is the selection of a PM a matter of qualifications for the job or a matter of family lineage?"
-
Icey
Re: David Cameron
I think there's a lot of back slapping that goes on, Yogi. "Do me a favour old boy, and I'll do you one back", sort of thing. Both David and Boris were members of the famous Bullingdon Club during their time at university. Being asked to become a member's seen as something of an elite status symbol, yet the initiation ceremonies're notoriously cruel and unpleasant. You can read about these "old school" societies here:
http://www.theguardian.com/politics/201 ... ord-secret
To answer your question, it's a tricky one Yogi. MP's from the main political parties're free to push possible candidates forward when the question of a new PM arises.
The sovereign at the time of office has the final say on whether the winning candidate's acceptable or not, but I've never heard of someone being denied suitability.
This's the "official" way in which future PMs're put into power.....
"The Prime Minister is not directly elected. Instead, the public vote for a single Member of Parliament, a representative from their constituency. There are 650 MPs in total. If one political party has a majority in the Commons, then the leader of that party will be appointed Prime Minister. Otherwise, party leaders will attempt to form a coalition or lead a minority government. Whoever has the support of the most Members of Parliament will generally be the Prime Minister. Note that the monarch's role is purely constitutional, they cannot simply pick their favourite."
It all sounds like it's bound up with old rules, and you can guarantee that cronyism plays its part. Jeremy Corbyn'd be a disaster if he became PM, and for want of the exact words, David Cameron's already told him to go away, but it's very intimidating to fight against the "voices". I truly can't see any of the contenders being any good now that Borris's backed off, but he had to, as half the country'd be against him from the start because he was encouraging a Leave verdict before the referendum. There's no really strong leader left, although Michael Gove might manage it, I don't know.
It's all becoming rather stale now, but someone'll have to get moving pretty sharply.
http://www.theguardian.com/politics/201 ... ord-secret
To answer your question, it's a tricky one Yogi. MP's from the main political parties're free to push possible candidates forward when the question of a new PM arises.
The sovereign at the time of office has the final say on whether the winning candidate's acceptable or not, but I've never heard of someone being denied suitability.
This's the "official" way in which future PMs're put into power.....
"The Prime Minister is not directly elected. Instead, the public vote for a single Member of Parliament, a representative from their constituency. There are 650 MPs in total. If one political party has a majority in the Commons, then the leader of that party will be appointed Prime Minister. Otherwise, party leaders will attempt to form a coalition or lead a minority government. Whoever has the support of the most Members of Parliament will generally be the Prime Minister. Note that the monarch's role is purely constitutional, they cannot simply pick their favourite."
It all sounds like it's bound up with old rules, and you can guarantee that cronyism plays its part. Jeremy Corbyn'd be a disaster if he became PM, and for want of the exact words, David Cameron's already told him to go away, but it's very intimidating to fight against the "voices". I truly can't see any of the contenders being any good now that Borris's backed off, but he had to, as half the country'd be against him from the start because he was encouraging a Leave verdict before the referendum. There's no really strong leader left, although Michael Gove might manage it, I don't know.
It's all becoming rather stale now, but someone'll have to get moving pretty sharply.