New Lords U Turn

rjt · 20-02-2007, 08:36 AM

house of Lords reform will now be decided by the traditional aye/no voting method of voting in the HOC after Jack Straw backed down as regards using a PR type method following extensive criticism notably by his own side.

The important thing for me is we start to get some democratic legitamacy into the HOL and whilst I am in favour of a fully elected house I will be pleased if any proportion is elected as it will be a step in the rright direction on the road to making us a modern democracy.

mkpdavies · 20-02-2007, 08:41 AM

Currently the Lords is a level 3 rubber stamp shop.

Westminster is level 2 and the MEPs are level 1.

The EU commission is the decision making body.

Even if we really had a decision making Westminster, I still can't see what value having a democratic rubber stamp second house would bring.

What practical value ill it add?

rjt · 20-02-2007, 09:40 AM

Because a second chamber should be more than a rubber stamp on my view, elected at the halfway point of a parlaiment it can provide a legitamte body to force unpoular governements to rethink their poilcys.

rjt · 20-02-2007, 09:40 AM

Because a second chamber should be more than a rubber stamp on my view, elected at the halfway point of a parlaiment it can provide a legitamte body to force unpoular governements to rethink their poilcys.

mkpdavies · 20-02-2007, 09:44 AM

You will have endless fights over who has legitimacy. Nothing will ever get done. We will become like Italy only worse.

blank_frackis · 20-02-2007, 06:36 PM

My opinion is we should elect the HOL but for different terms from the HOC. This works well in the U.S so I don't see why it would be a problem here. You could have members of the HOL elected for ten years for instance.

John Carter · 20-02-2007, 06:49 PM

My view:

Get rid of all the Blair cronies and restore it to how it was in 1996.

New members of the HOL are then selected as such:

Time served MPs are elected via a first-round vote from fellow MPs.
Second (and final) voting round is handed to the public in some way.

Of course, to be completely impartial this also requires my patented "ban all political parties" scheme to be operative.

Nick Moody · 20-02-2007, 07:19 PM

I will just reiterate my opinion on the HOL and that is that the hereditary peers should be restored in full. If we have elected peers it will just be the same as the HOC, and if we have a House full of appointed peers it will just be down to cronyism. Elected politicians have some of the worst reputations in this country and for that reason I don't understand the arguement for having elected peers in the HOL.

arden forester · 21-02-2007, 02:17 PM

The runners and riders in the Level 3 Rubber Stamp Shop stakes (Conservative jockeys only)! :shock:
http://www.parliament.uk/documents/u...tice070207.pdf
My horse is supporting the Earl of Stockton! 8)

g hall · 21-02-2007, 05:23 PM

How about House of Parliament reform by Guy Fawkes and soon
He can do the EU on a BOGOF deal

20-02-2007, 08:36 AM	#1 (permalink)
rjt Uber Member Join Date: Oct 2004 Location: Aldershot Posts: 5,479	New Lords U Turn house of Lords reform will now be decided by the traditional aye/no voting method of voting in the HOC after Jack Straw backed down as regards using a PR type method following extensive criticism notably by his own side. The important thing for me is we start to get some democratic legitamacy into the HOL and whilst I am in favour of a fully elected house I will be pleased if any proportion is elected as it will be a step in the rright direction on the road to making us a modern democracy.

20-02-2007, 08:41 AM	#2 (permalink)
mkpdavies Uber Member Join Date: Sep 2004 Location: Woking Posts: 31,112 Party: Libertarian Party	Currently the Lords is a level 3 rubber stamp shop. Westminster is level 2 and the MEPs are level 1. The EU commission is the decision making body. Even if we really had a decision making Westminster, I still can't see what value having a democratic rubber stamp second house would bring. What practical value ill it add? __________________ http://brits4ronpaul.blogspot.com/ http://wokinglibertarians.blogspot.com/ http://lpuk.org My ignore list Labour, Blue Labour, Lib Dems

20-02-2007, 09:44 AM	#5 (permalink)
mkpdavies Uber Member Join Date: Sep 2004 Location: Woking Posts: 31,112 Party: Libertarian Party	You will have endless fights over who has legitimacy. Nothing will ever get done. We will become like Italy only worse. __________________ http://brits4ronpaul.blogspot.com/ http://wokinglibertarians.blogspot.com/ http://lpuk.org My ignore list Labour, Blue Labour, Lib Dems

20-02-2007, 06:36 PM	#6 (permalink)
blank_frackis Member Join Date: Nov 2006 Posts: 314 $blank_frackis is just starting out$	My opinion is we should elect the HOL but for different terms from the HOC. This works well in the U.S so I don't see why it would be a problem here. You could have members of the HOL elected for ten years for instance.
$blank_frackis is offline$

21-02-2007, 02:17 PM	#9 (permalink)
arden forester Uber Member Join Date: May 2005 Location: Solihull, in The Forest of Arden, Warwickshire! Posts: 2,693 Party: None	The runners and riders in the Level 3 Rubber Stamp Shop stakes (Conservative jockeys only)! :shock: http://www.parliament.uk/documents/u...tice070207.pdf My horse is supporting the Earl of Stockton! 8) __________________ www.ardenforester.blogspot.com www.westminster-whispers.blogspot.com

20-02-2007, 09:40 AM	#3 (permalink)
rjt Uber Member Join Date: Oct 2004 Location: Aldershot Posts: 5,479	Because a second chamber should be more than a rubber stamp on my view, elected at the halfway point of a parlaiment it can provide a legitamte body to force unpoular governements to rethink their poilcys.

20-02-2007, 09:40 AM	#4 (permalink)
rjt Uber Member Join Date: Oct 2004 Location: Aldershot Posts: 5,479	Because a second chamber should be more than a rubber stamp on my view, elected at the halfway point of a parlaiment it can provide a legitamte body to force unpoular governements to rethink their poilcys.

20-02-2007, 06:49 PM	#7 (permalink)
John Carter Uber Member Join Date: Mar 2005 Location: On Sabbatical Posts: 5,110	My view: Get rid of all the Blair cronies and restore it to how it was in 1996. New members of the HOL are then selected as such: Time served MPs are elected via a first-round vote from fellow MPs. Second (and final) voting round is handed to the public in some way. Of course, to be completely impartial this also requires my patented "ban all political parties" scheme to be operative.

20-02-2007, 07:19 PM	#8 (permalink)
Nick Moody Member Join Date: Jan 2005 Location: North Yorkshire Posts: 100	I will just reiterate my opinion on the HOL and that is that the hereditary peers should be restored in full. If we have elected peers it will just be the same as the HOC, and if we have a House full of appointed peers it will just be down to cronyism. Elected politicians have some of the worst reputations in this country and for that reason I don't understand the arguement for having elected peers in the HOL.

21-02-2007, 05:23 PM	#10 (permalink)
g hall Uber Member Join Date: Nov 2006 Location: erewhon Posts: 5,614	How about House of Parliament reform by Guy Fawkes and soon He can do the EU on a BOGOF deal

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Email this Page
Display Modes
Linear Mode Switch to Hybrid Mode Switch to Threaded Mode