SEVEN Labour MPs were asked yesterday if Gordon Brown should call an early General Election. They replied:
Ian Gibson, MP for Norwich North, said: "Gordon should go for it. His speech was a manifesto. Now all we are waiting for is the date."
Nigel Griffiths, MP for Edinburgh South, said: "If we have the election now, my majority will go up from 400 to 3000. It is a gamble but he should take it."
Ian Davidson, MP for Glasgow South, said: "I'm generally in favour of an early election. The Opposition are in such disarray. Gordon comes across as a normal human being while the Tories are led by a toff who has lost his way and the Liberals are led by an elderly toff who is in similar difficulties at the moment."
George Foulkes, Labour peer and MSP, said: "It would be an unnecessary risk. He does not need to call an election and has got three more years before he has to go to the country. He has got to be careful. I think he would want to build up a programme of policy and the earliest he would go for an election is next spring."
David Hamilton, MP for Midlothian and chairman of the Scottish parliamentary group at Westminster, said: "Two weeks ago I would not have supported an early election but the climate has changed. The party is ready for it and so Gordon should go as soon as he can."
Brian Donohoe, MP for Central Ayrshire, said: "I don't think he should go for an early election. He is doing exceptionally well and people know that.
The only reason he would go for an election is to get a mandate but I don't think he needs that mandate as he has proved himself to be an exceptional holder of the post. It could backfire. It would be mad in these circumstances and to do it for short-term gain would be seen through by the public."
Ann Clwyd, MP for Cynon Valley, said: "Yes. It's because of the polls. No doubt, he would like confirmation for people to choose him as their Prime Minister."
Why are you making commenting on The Herald only available to subscribers?
It should have been a safe space for informed debate, somewhere for readers to discuss issues around the biggest stories of the day, but all too often the below the line comments on most websites have become bogged down by off-topic discussions and abuse.
heraldscotland.com is tackling this problem by allowing only subscribers to comment.
We are doing this to improve the experience for our loyal readers and we believe it will reduce the ability of trolls and troublemakers, who occasionally find their way onto our site, to abuse our journalists and readers. We also hope it will help the comments section fulfil its promise as a part of Scotland's conversation with itself.
We are lucky at The Herald. We are read by an informed, educated readership who can add their knowledge and insights to our stories.
That is invaluable.
We are making the subscriber-only change to support our valued readers, who tell us they don't want the site cluttered up with irrelevant comments, untruths and abuse.
In the past, the journalist’s job was to collect and distribute information to the audience. Technology means that readers can shape a discussion. We look forward to hearing from you on heraldscotland.com
Comments & Moderation
Readers’ comments: You are personally liable for the content of any comments you upload to this website, so please act responsibly. We do not pre-moderate or monitor readers’ comments appearing on our websites, but we do post-moderate in response to complaints we receive or otherwise when a potential problem comes to our attention. You can make a complaint by using the ‘report this post’ link . We may then apply our discretion under the user terms to amend or delete comments.
Post moderation is undertaken full-time 9am-6pm on weekdays, and on a part-time basis outwith those hours.
Read the rules hereComments are closed on this article