Wednesday 4th March

Margaret Thatcher was Prime Minister for over ten years, and many were shocked when she actually went, deposed by her own party.  She obviously wanted to carry on, was desperate to remain and was devastated at what she (and some still do) saw as treachery from within.  Tony Blair was P.M. for almost ten, and equally deposed from within, and he undoubtedly thought the country would be better if he had remained as P.M.  One of the more interesting ideas from America is the Statute of Limitations, whereby a President can only serve for two terms, or eight years.  Harold Wilson was elected in 1964 and left office in 1970, after six years.  Unlike now, when a defeated leader of a party almost has to resign, he remained leader and in 1974 he was re-elected.  But suddenly in, I think 1977, he resigned and Callaghan won the ensuing leadership election.  Harold gave as part of his reason, that the country needed fresh thinking, and that when you have been in the job for a number of years you get lazy in your analysis of problems.  Every Prime Minister wants to be re-elected, at least once, but few actually are.  The public tire of them and their own parties tire of them too.  But if you had the very ambition to put yourself forward as a leader of your party and are elected and then become P.M. you obviously want to hang on to the job.  But when you have been there for maybe two terms, what do you really have left in the tank?  The job must be draining, the sense of failure despite some successes must be overwhelming.  Almost every Prime Minister’s term ends in failure.

And the strange thing too, is that in America former Presidents are held in reverence.  They are still referred to as Mr. President.  They usually donate their private papers as a library for scholars.  Here, our former P.M.s are held almost in contempt, they are openly vilified, many calling for their arrest even for taking us illegally into wars, or they are quietly forgotten; we don’t talk about them and their own parties quietly disown them.  Maybe we should have a similar limit on how long any Prime Minister can remain.  In America it is eight years and that seems about right.  Rather than have to keep facing re-election a P.M. could leave office, not as a result of failure (either kicked out by the electorate or their own party) but as a distinguished end to a period of service to their country.  It would take away that arrogance, that over-riding ambition that so dominates our politicians.    Cameron brought in fixed term parliaments, which was maybe a mistake, but five years certainly was.  Maybe two four year terms should be the maximum a P.M. could serve.  It might be a better system both for us and for them.