What are the chances of Labour dumping Brown?
James Forsyth 6:28pm
Three MPs have announced they are standing down at the next election today; proof that the expenses scandal is getting more deadly for MPs as it goes on. But, in the background, the conversation about whether Brown can survive what Anne McEloy has dubbed the Ides of June is getting louder.
Over at the always excellent Comment Central, Daniel Finkelstein and Philip Collins try and work out what the percentage chances of Brown being removed are. Danny’s calculations lead him to conclude that there’s “only a 12% chance that [Brown] goes”.
I suspect, although this is based more on a hunch than mathematics, that the number is higher than this. I don’t think Alan Johnson would be on manoeuvres if he didn’t believe there was a decent chance of the situation becoming vacant. Also, remember that last time Brown’s position was in danger some wavering Labour MPs were deterred from moving against him by the fact that there didn’t appear to be a more palatable alternative to Brown. They feared having to choose between Harman, David Miliband and Balls in the leadership contest that would have followed. Now, they can rest assured that Harman won’t stand and that Miliband and Balls are in no position to.
In the week beginning June 8th, Labour Cabinet Ministers and MPs will have to make a choice: stick with Brown or go for Johnson. I suspect that the likelihood of them deciding that the latter option is more likely to save their skins is significantly higher than 12 percent.



Previous




kit salopian
May 28th, 2009 6:46pm Report this commentYou may be right James - but only if there is an election for Leader. It really is difficult to imagine the country accepting a second unelected PM.
In truth Brown could argue that people knew that he would be the next PM (because the Tories said "vote blair get brown) and voted accordingly .
But nobody imagined that there would be a THIRD PM in this Parliament. So if Brown were to beoutsted there would have to be a general no later than late October '09.
But none of the Parties will be ready: the expenses reforms will not be in place; the constituencies will have little time to find replacements for sacked MPs whom they would otherwise have expected to stand.
And Labour know this. For Johnston to have a chance of mitigating the catastrophe awaiting Labour he would need time to develop his presence and his policies.
So yes Brown should go; but I'd happily bet at 8 to 1 that he'll stay
David Ossitt
May 28th, 2009 7:13pm Report this commentAny candidate who is truly suitable as a leader; would be stupid to take on the task prior to a General Election.
Whoever leads them into an election; and then loses that election will have to resign, combine this with the fact that Gordon Brown will not stand aside for anyone, particularly for those who he sees as lesser beings.
Gordon will lead labour in the May of 2010 into the next General Election.
James Burdett
May 28th, 2009 7:27pm Report this commentThere is a problem though of seeming to view Labour as operating in isolation. The process of removing Brown will cause more damage to Labour. That is before you get into the debate about what proportion of Labour's predicament is Labour and what Brown. Also there is no way that the opposition are going to go radio silent whilst Labour removes Brown. Finally if they succeed and Johnson or someone else is installed unless they change policies the move will look pointless, and if they change policies the questions will be asked well why did you go along with it under Brown?
There is no way that removing Brown is going to be able to be clean. The big mistake that Labour made was in having a coronation for Brown, having a regicide might prove to be a different mistake but just as grave.
Chuck Unsworth
May 28th, 2009 7:31pm Report this commentThis is all about time and timings. There's precious little time for any usurper to establish him/herself with the Labour Party and the electorate. There's no obvious successor. All of them are now tainted and tired. No matter who gets to being a 'leader' there'll be the question of acceptance without a General Election. So whoever puts themself forward will not only have to oust Brown, fight off other contenders, establish a Parliamentary presence and fight a General Election - all at the same time. Anyone with the slightest ability to do all that? And time marches on.
Jonathan_T
May 28th, 2009 7:32pm Report this commentBetfair odds currently suggest c. 11.5% chance of Brown going as party leader by end of June, and c. 28.5% by end of September.
Nicholas
May 28th, 2009 7:38pm Report this commentHa! They haven't factored in the big yellow streak that runs down the back of all Labour MP's. Brown is here for the duration and will be the next PM. He is Britain's Mugabe.
Alan
May 28th, 2009 7:41pm Report this comment"I suspect, although this is based more on a hunch than mathematics"
You don't have to 'suspect', there is no mathematics there - only arithemetic.
Verity
May 28th, 2009 8:37pm Report this commentWhat Nicholas said.
john miller
May 28th, 2009 9:29pm Report this commentThe real equation, as previous commenters have pointed out, is whether Labour gamble on grossly insulting the electorate by foisting a third leader upon them and hoping the voters forget the treachery by next year.
Another point to bear in mind is that Brown is playing the scorched earth endgame with the Tories. He will be quite happy to play this with even greater ferocity against his fellow Labour Party members. The Tories can't oust him immediately; possibly his comrades can.
I won't ramble on about my predicted scenario again, but Brown will only go when he bottles the election, not before.
I will, however, ramble about Darling's recent defence of his ludicrous, false Budget predictions. I predict we will see some amazing statistics emerging from the Treasury later in the year and early next year proving that Darling was right and that - gosh! - by May 2010 Britain will be Great again...
Bocephus
May 28th, 2009 9:48pm Report this commentIf Alan Johnson takes over he had better call the election immediately before he gets found out.
Who are we kidding here? What's the guy actually done to deserve to be PM? He's never held one of the great offices of state, never lead a political party, never been regarded as one of the country's great thinkers. Failed in a deputy leadership bid less than 2 years ago.
The whole thing is a joke.
hadrian
May 28th, 2009 10:39pm Report this commentI just think we're too close to the last date that Labour can hold out to for them to think it'd be worth all the bloodletting and hastle. Plus the sure and certain hope of defeat is hardly likely to attract many applicants for the post! So unless there's complete and total panic I cannot foresee Broon being ditched, sadly.
Jeremy
May 28th, 2009 10:48pm Report this commentFor me, Brown's failure to secure an invitation for Her Majesty The Queen to attend the 65th Anniversary of D-Day events is the final straw. I could not give a fig for Obama, Sarkozy or Brown - they're just transient politicians. Here today and gone tomorrow. But The Queen is the last surviving Head of State to have actually served in the Second World War and I have read of the upset it has caused to the British veterans not to be able to march before their sovereign on the day. That upset, to my mind, is unforgivable.
Brown is toast. And the sooner he realises it, the better.
Tiberius
May 29th, 2009 12:42am Report this commentThere are many characterizations of Brown, one of which is the stubborn thing that just won't go away no matter how many times you flush.
It's June 2010, unless he invokes civil contingency, in which case only Dyno Rod will shift him.
Howard
May 29th, 2009 7:08am Report this commentThis bunch of thieving, socialist turkeys won't vote for Christmas.
Richard Holloway
May 29th, 2009 8:57am Report this commentThey just won't do it because they are in a catch 22 situation. With Brown they will certainly lose whenever the election is called, however if they change him they have to call an immediate general election. Given the extremely anti-politician mood at the moment I can't see MPs liking that option either. So they will dither and wait and Gordon Brown will be forced to call in June next year. It will be a horrible year.
Roger
May 29th, 2009 9:42am Report this commentLabour MPs will calculate whether it is financially better for them to risk a GE in Autumn or the Spring, I suspect that the herd of troughers will go for the latter.
Ian C
May 29th, 2009 10:53am Report this commentEvents....... The odds make this one worth a bet.
Brown out by Party conference and election in week 1 of Nov.
Jeremy R
June 8th, 2009 3:54pm Report this commentThe Telegraph must accept some responsibility for the election results.
Keep up the good work.
Back to top