Labour propose to replace The Lords
Discussion
Labour would abolish the House of Lords
Of course, replacing them with an elected chamber then raises the question of what voting system you use, and then which house is more representative of the people...
Of course, replacing them with an elected chamber then raises the question of what voting system you use, and then which house is more representative of the people...
Something doesnt sit right when boris hands them out to 30yo women . You have to wonder what his long term motivation is being as he is a bit of a
It if happens do they currrent ones get the boot or just run down the clock till they peg it. Personally they should all just be locked out from day one.
It if happens do they currrent ones get the boot or just run down the clock till they peg it. Personally they should all just be locked out from day one.
Fundoreen said:
Something doesnt sit right when boris hands them out to 30yo women . You have to wonder what his long term motivation is being as he is a bit of a
It if happens do they currrent ones get the boot or just run down the clock till they peg it. Personally they should all just be locked out from day one.
Any comment about SKS's proposal?It if happens do they currrent ones get the boot or just run down the clock till they peg it. Personally they should all just be locked out from day one.
This thread is about Labour's idea to scrap The House of Lords...
The whole thing is unjustifiable. Hereditary peers making laws because of an accident of birth. Life Peers where you can be appointed and still be checking in and picking up your cheque 50 years later. Ex PMs of both parties appointing their pals.
800 peers.
If it isn't completely abolished it needs radical reform. If elected then PR.
If not elected -
Upper age limit. 70?
Max 300 members.
Max term 10 years.
No new appointments unless there is vacancies below 300.
No appointments by PM.
Vacancies filled in turn by appointees nominated by various public/professional bodies. Medical. Scientific, industrial, educational etc.
If political appointees are required - strictly limited. Perhaps spaces for former PMs/chancellors.
On average a 300 member house with 10 year term would allow 30 appointments per year. Perhaps 10 political. the rest with expertise in other fields.
800 peers.
If it isn't completely abolished it needs radical reform. If elected then PR.
If not elected -
Upper age limit. 70?
Max 300 members.
Max term 10 years.
No new appointments unless there is vacancies below 300.
No appointments by PM.
Vacancies filled in turn by appointees nominated by various public/professional bodies. Medical. Scientific, industrial, educational etc.
If political appointees are required - strictly limited. Perhaps spaces for former PMs/chancellors.
On average a 300 member house with 10 year term would allow 30 appointments per year. Perhaps 10 political. the rest with expertise in other fields.
b
hstewie said:
hstewie said: There's a bit of a link don't you think?
Whatever your views on the Lords the sight of Johnson stuffing it full of people like Lebedev and his own brother has gone down like a bucket of cold sick.
It's opportunism from Starmer but he's been handed it on a plate.
I thought you were better than that, stewie?Whatever your views on the Lords the sight of Johnson stuffing it full of people like Lebedev and his own brother has gone down like a bucket of cold sick.
It's opportunism from Starmer but he's been handed it on a plate.
irc said:
The whole thing is unjustifiable. Hereditary peers making laws because of an accident of birth. Life Peers where you can be appointed and still be checking in and picking up your cheque 50 years later. Ex PMs of both parties appointing their pals.
800 peers.
If it isn't completely abolished it needs radical reform. If elected then PR.
If not elected -
Upper age limit. 70?
other stuff...
Just a minute, what's wrong with Octogenarians?800 peers.
If it isn't completely abolished it needs radical reform. If elected then PR.
If not elected -
Upper age limit. 70?
other stuff...
irc said:
The whole thing is unjustifiable. Hereditary peers making laws because of an accident of birth. Life Peers where you can be appointed and still be checking in and picking up your cheque 50 years later. Ex PMs of both parties appointing their pals.
<snip>
This sums it up for me. Totally unjustifiable. The whole thing absolutely reeks. Especially as they do indeed just seem to appoint their mates, or those who they need something from.<snip>
I agree with Starmer on this.
pequod said:
I thought you were better than that, stewie?
Better than what?The Lords needs reform I expect most people see that.
Would it be anyone's priority with all the other stuff going on right now?
I rather doubt it but the sight of Johnson's own brother along with the son of a former KGB agent and an IRA sympathiser being ennobled probably means it's higher up the list than it otherwise would have been.
Not sure what's controversial about that.
smn159 said:
Can't happen soon enough
Agree totally- it's a bloated, anachronistic structure of privilege & patronage, that is wholly unaccountable. Being regarded as the only check on the 'Tyranny of the Commons' says more about the present parlous state of English FPTP democracy than being any sort of encomium. Edited by maddog993 on Sunday 20th November 18:27
bhstewie said:
hstewie said: Better than what?
The Lords needs reform I expect most people see that.
Would it be anyone's priority with all the other stuff going on right now?
I rather doubt it but the sight of Johnson's own brother along with the son of a former KGB agent and an IRA sympathiser being ennobled probably means it's higher up the list than it otherwise would have been.
Not sure what's controversial about that.
Needs spelling out?The Lords needs reform I expect most people see that.
Would it be anyone's priority with all the other stuff going on right now?
I rather doubt it but the sight of Johnson's own brother along with the son of a former KGB agent and an IRA sympathiser being ennobled probably means it's higher up the list than it otherwise would have been.
Not sure what's controversial about that.
Stay on topic, this is not about Boris or any other Tory appointments...
Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff