Odds on Cameron Resigning slashed from 100/1 to 20/1.

[ladybirder]

Thought you'd like to know.

[Bobbisox]

I can't see him going tbh lady although his position isn't as strong now with Sir Paul Stevens doing the right thing

[ladybirder]

I can't read your answer I m transfixed by your avatar.

[gollysailor]

Even the Japanese no longer fall on their swords!! Someone will have to push him. And if he does go, who replaces him?

[rov1100]

Is there a reson I haven't heard about?

[Bobbisox]

lady I have many worries...sorry :-(

[ladybirder]

Rov I heard it on Sky News about half an hour ago. It wasn't elaborated on.

Bobbi, poor you, must be a terrible thing that has happened to you overnight. I hope to see you restored to your usual self soon.

[anotheoldgit]

If it did happen it would be no great loss, but who would replace him?

Although Nick Clegg is the deputy Prime Minister could he (so help us)?

But since the Conservatives won the election, would the PM have to be chosen from the Tories?

[ichkeria]

Clegg would be PM until the Tories elected a new leader. Then he or she'd be PM until this disastrous goverment finally keeled over, there was an election and Ed Miliband became PM.
In my unbiased opinion, of course :-)

[jno]

can't see Cameron resigning or being pushed, but he's shown dreadful judgment throughout this affair. He was a much better leader of the opposition than PM - he read the public mood on MPs' expenses very well; this time it's Miliband who's making the running.

[R1Geezer]

Clegg would not be PM anyway, there is no legal position of "deputy PM", the PM would be the acting leader of the Tory party, Will Hague I believe, who'd soon become the leader of the party and full time PM.

[ichkeria]

I'm sure Clegg WOULD be PM. No point having a deputy if he isn't going to step in in an emergency. If would be disastrous for the coalition if Cameron went and the Tories insisted on shoving their own makeshift replacement in when Clegg's been Number two all along. Admittedly he might not last as long as the election of a new Tory leader, but then arguably the govt wouldn't last that long anyway.
Still, it won't happen - sadly :-)

[ichkeria]

"can't see Cameron resigning or being pushed, but he's shown dreadful judgment throughout this affair. He was a much better leader of the opposition than PM - he read the public mood on MPs' expenses very well; this time it's Miliband who's making the running."

The expenses scandal was made for the Tories - for one thing it's always easier in opposition, especially with an unpopular govt and PM being hounded by Andy Coulson's old mates in Wapping and elsewhere. Brown was just as hot on the expenses thing, but by then no one was listening to him.
The Tories love to have a go at politicians - which is odd because they are politicians themselves - and they hate government which is why (IMHO) they aren't very good at it (!). Now they ARE the govt and this particular issue seems to touch him personally, if only by association.
Ed has him by the curlies: if Dave doesn't do what Ed says then he looks out of touch. And if he DOES do what Ed says then it looks as if he's only doing it because Ed said so!

[R1Geezer]

there is no "deputy PM", the position is notional and a convenience it has no weight. Do you really imagine that they'd have let Clegg have that job if there was any chance he'd become PM?

[jno]

ichkeria, I don't think that's right - without digging into the archives, I'm pretty sure Brown was quite slow off the mark over MPs' expenses, just saying it was a bad thing and something should be done, while Cameron was jumping at the opportunity to get rid of Tory backwoodsmen and replace them with Cameroonies. That suited his purposes, of course; but it was in tune with the public mood.

You're right that life is easier in opposition - but nobody wants to be there. None the less, Camron could have made a hash of dealing with expenses, as Miliband could have made a hash of hacking; but both rose to the occasion more impressively than their opposite numbers.

[emmie]

why should he resign, and as to Ed Milliband as Pm, give us a break. Almost as windy as Neil Kinnock and that is saying something.

[BayBoy1]

Old Git But since the conservatives won the election ??? which election do you mean???They did not win the last one , did you not know that we now have a coalition gov??

[Old_Geezer]

If it pulls the suckers, er i mean punters in, it'll've proven to be a good move.

[emmie]

Ladybirder Where did you get the information from?
and if some need reminding, it's a coalition, not the Tories running the show.

[ichkeria]

The Tories tune in very well to the Great British Public's suspicion of politicians - they like to style themselves as on the side of the people versus those corrupt folk at Westminster taking all the hard-working tax-payers money.
The MPs expenses affair was a bit different to the NOTW affair also. In the first case it was open season on all politicians and those politicians - on either side - who spoke out against the lynchmob mentality were howled down. With the hacking scandal the public hasn't turned against all journalists, largely because they don't hold them in the same contempt (they don't care for tabloid journalists but it isn't quite the same).
Brown may have been slow off the mark - I can't remember either - but his real problem was no one was listening to him any more. He could have had all MPs burned at the stake and it would have made no difference. Cameron isn't quite in that position, but that's because he's been outflanked by the leader of the opposition.

[jno]

I think that's the thing, ichkeria: Brown was seen as out of touch with real people, and his slowness to respond to the expenses scandal simply reinforced this. If he'd acted faster and more forcefully, some voters might have changed their minds. As it was, it was Cameron who looked both decisive and responsive to the public mood.