I’ve studiously ignored recent media speculation around when Tony Blair might stand down as British Prime Minister – it’s all seemed rather academic, uninformed, and boring. Now there’s some movement, which brings to mind The Big Lebowski’s dancing landlord – painfully clumsy.

Blair’s been PM for nine years now, and it’s universally accepted that it’s time for him to toddle on out, fairly soon. He’s reluctant to give an exact date of departure though, and fair enough I say – who’s going to take a Prime Minister seriously when they know he’s only got a few months left? Chancellor Gordon Brown fancies himself as Blair’s successor, and has been pushing for Blair to name a date.

The fur really started flying yesterday with, apparently, a heated debate between Blair and Brown, and the resignation of a Minister and several party officials. It’s high politics in the leading party of one of the world’s most powerful nations, yet it smacks of little kids throwing their toys out of the cot.

I don’t understand why Brown thinks he’s entitled to be handed power from Blair. It seems entirely undemocratic for a leader to pass power to a chosen one. And this aggressive manoeuvring shows the party as lacking cohesion, which is not a good look.

My only experience with this kind of leadership change came in New Zealand in 1997 when Jenny Shipley staged a coup. While Prime Minister Jim Bolger was out of the country, she quietly went around the National Party Members of Parliament and counted up her support. She had a majority of support, amongst the MPs of the party that had won the most number of votes in the last election. Yes, it was rather underhand, and yes, I find Shipley absolutely repulsive and wouldn’t wish her leadership on anyone, but nevertheless, it seemed a vaguely democratic way of going about things.

Now, I’m no expert on British politics, so maybe this method is entirely unfeasible given the governmental structure. But perhaps a similar format along more open lines could work, with a number of candidates putting themselves forward to a caucus vote.

This public fighting does the Labour party no good, and a quiet handover of power echoes of dictators and tyrants.

However it’s done, a quick succession is absolutely necessary, to avoid Blair looking even more like a dummy in his final months, and to minimise his ability to rush through stupid, hot-headed, last minute legislation knowing he will face little repercussion.

Other posts by Katie Llanos-Small