Where was Gordon's Mandate?

According to Paul Flynn:

"There is now a wide coalition of MPs from all wings of the Labour Party who are sadly convinced that a change of leadership in now unavoidable. It is hoped that Gordon will accept the will of the PLP and agree to a swift orderly exit."

But Mr Flynn thinks that Gordon Brown has been unfairly maligned by the Press and the public for the expenses scandal. However, what Paul Flynn fails to recognise or completely ignores is that Gordon Brown is perceived to have no mandate from the general electorate. In the public eyes Gordon Brown usurped the democratically elected Prime Minister with no legitimacy; it was a succession rather than a justification of the democratic process.

If Gordon Brown had gone to the public in October 2007 and called for a general election, he would currently be in a better situation with a justifiable mandate to govern. However, there is no mandate from the public, many people are feeling disenfranchised by the whole process. The Government have pursued policies that detach themselves from the electorate; ID cards etc. This is the main reason the public and press have turned on Gordon Brown, in a Parliament where there seems little in the way of accountability the expenses scandal was the straw that broke the camels back.

If the Labour Party choose to follow a path of electing another leader without the promise of a general election shortly afterwards, the feelings of disenfranchisement amongst the public will continually increase.