Labour propose to replace The Lords

[Solocle]

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...

[ChocolateFrog]

There's nearly 800 of the buggers.

Not that they need it but it'll be a vote winner.

Who really likes the Lords system as it is?

[randlemarcus]

ChocolateFrog said:

Who really likes the Lords system as it is?

1) The Lords.
2) HoC folk who see it as a target to aim for when they can't be arsed doing an actual job any more
3) Business folk, and charity folk who see it as a just reward for doing their jobs.

[pequod]

Replace them with a system the Swiss use, Direct Democracy?

And whilst they're at it, reduce the number of MP's too...

[Fundoreen]

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.

[pequod]

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?

This thread is about Labour's idea to scrap The House of Lords...

[smn159]

Can't happen soon enough

[bitchstewie]

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.

[irc]

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.

[pequod]

bhstewie 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?

[pequod]

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?

[anonymous-user]

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.

I agree with Starmer on this.

[bitchstewie]

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.

[glazbagun]

Can't say I'd oppose it. Though replacing it with something that isn't a populist disaster may take some doing.

[E63eeeeee...]

Can't happen soon enough, but this smells like Starmer ducking PR again to me.

[maddog993]

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

[pequod]

bhstewie 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?

Stay on topic, this is not about Boris or any other Tory appointments...

[anonymous-user]

bhstewie 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.

[Wills2]

I don't want another 800 elected grifters in the pockets of think tanks and vested interests it's bad enough in the HoC without doubling down on it.

[bitchstewie]

pequod said:

Needs spelling out?

Stay on topic, this is not about Boris or any other Tory appointments...

It's entirely on topic given Starmer himself has literally said it's about peerages being handed out by the Conservatives to "lackeys and donors".