House of Lords

[drdel]

So they are exercising their muscles again - mostly against the Government and, the latest vote's anti-Brexit, could be anti-democratic!

Should they be restructured / abolished as being out of kilter in a modern society?

 

[chrisd]

So they are exercising their muscles again - mostly against the Government and, the latest vote's anti-Brexit, could be anti-democratic!

Should they be restructured / abolished as being out of kilter in a modern society?

No they shouldn't be abolished as there is a need for a second chamber but definitely restructured and made smaller in number.

 

[Hacker Khan]

So they are exercising their muscles again - mostly against the Government and, the latest vote's anti-Brexit, could be anti-democratic!

Should they be restructured / abolished as being out of kilter in a modern society?

So every time they do not rubber stamp the government's proposals they are anti-democratic?

 

[Lord Tyrion]

Abolished. The make up of The Lord's is a nonsense and an insult. Replace it with something legitimate.

 

[Hacker Khan]

Abolished. The make up of The Lord's is a nonsense and an insult. Replace it with something legitimate.

I don't know, I quote like a few checks and balances by a chamber that just does not vote on party lines every time to keep the current government of the time from following any crazy far right or left wing ideology.

 

[Lord Tyrion]

I don't know, I quote like a few checks and balances by a chamber that just does not vote on party lines every time to keep the current government of the time from following any crazy far right or left wing ideology.

I agree but I find the current system offensive. Other countries manage to balance the main chamber without such a antiquated system. I'm sure we could manage to find an alternative.

 

[Hobbit]

I don't know, I quote like a few checks and balances by a chamber that just does not vote on party lines every time to keep the current government of the time from following any crazy far right or left wing ideology.

I'm not sure I agree with an unelected chamber being able to overturn the policies of an elected govt. I might not like what the Tories are currently doing but I like what the Lords have done even less.

And don't forget, that's just one issue. What happens when a moderate govt has its policies defeated in the Lords, which did happen several times when Blair was in office.

Yes to a second chamber, but along the lines of Congress and Senate in the US. Both houses have separate powers, although I'm not sure of the finer details it does seem to work well most of the time.

 

[Old Skier]

There are parts of the Lords that do excellent work but to try and de-rail two democratic votes to leave the EU, one by the people and one by Parliament just shows how the political class are determined to get their own way.

 

[SocketRocket]

The best thing the Government could do is flood the Lords with a mass of Tory Peers so they have a majority, vote down everything the Labour/Lib Dems propose such that it becomes a laughing stock and has to be dissolved. It's not fit for purpose.

 

[Hacker Khan]

I'm not sure I agree with an unelected chamber being able to overturn the policies of an elected govt. I might not like what the Tories are currently doing but I like what the Lords have done even less.

And don't forget, that's just one issue. What happens when a moderate govt has its policies defeated in the Lords, which did happen several times when Blair was in office.

Yes to a second chamber, but along the lines of Congress and Senate in the US. Both houses have separate powers, although I'm not sure of the finer details it does seem to work well most of the time.

But that is mostly just voting purely on increasingly fractious and disparate political allegiances, give or take the odd rebel. I like the idea of a slightly less politicised chamber holding government to account.

 

[Hacker Khan]

There are parts of the Lords that do excellent work but to try and de-rail two democratic votes to leave the EU, one by the people and one by Parliament just shows how the political class are determined to get their own way.

Again, if you are stating the House of Lords can not vote against parliament then that is missing the point of the House of Lords. The House of Lords are part of Parliament, it is made up of the elected house of commons based on political allegiances and the appointed house of lords, who are less politicised. Parliament is there to represent our interests and make sure they are taken into account by the Government. The Government cannot make new laws or raise new taxes without Parliament’s agreement. The Lords shares the task of making and shaping laws and checking and challenging the work of the government.

So claiming they are 'undemocratic' by voting against parliament/government is wrong in our current system as the HOL hold government to account and they are part of parliament. In fact I would argue that government being able to steamroller any laws through with no scrutiny by parliament is actually more undemocratic.

 

[Doon frae Troon]

The best thing the Government could do is flood the Lords with a mass of Tory Peers so they have a majority, vote down everything the Labour/Lib Dems propose such that it becomes a laughing stock and has to be dissolved. It's not fit for purpose.

They have done that for years and Labour have just followed suit.
That is why we have over 800 unelected officials deciding the future of the UK.
At least the EU make decisions by elected officials.:lol:

 

[IanM]

They have done that for years and Labour have just followed suit.
That is why we have over 800 unelected officials deciding the future of the UK.
At least the EU make decisions by (foreign) officials, some of whom are elected. :lol:

Fixed that for you

 

[Doon frae Troon]

Fixed that for you

No need to do that, please show respect to what other people posts.

 

[IanM]

...or an appropriate level of humour?

 

[patricks148]

The best thing the Government could do is flood the Lords with a mass of Tory Peers so they have a majority, vote down everything the Labour/Lib Dems propose such that it becomes a laughing stock and has to be dissolved. It's not fit for purpose.

i thought they already did that?

 

[drdel]

Again, if you are stating the House of Lords can not vote against parliament then that is missing the point of the House of Lords. The House of Lords are part of Parliament, it is made up of the elected house of commons based on political allegiances and the appointed house of lords, who are less politicised. Parliament is there to represent our interests and make sure they are taken into account by the Government. The Government cannot make new laws or raise new taxes without Parliament’s agreement. The Lords shares the task of making and shaping laws and checking and challenging the work of the government.

So claiming they are 'undemocratic' by voting against parliament/government is wrong in our current system as the HOL hold government to account and they are part of parliament. In fact I would argue that government being able to steamroller any laws through with no scrutiny by parliament is actually more undemocratic.

I'd agree with you but for the fact the HoL has become politicised and, in the case of Brexit, its acting on the basis of the 'party' biased members.

The Liberals have been particularly active as the anti-Brexit lobby which has led to, IMO, an aim to disrupt the Government who has (in the unique case of Brexit) a clear referendum vote to follow through.

 

[Scoobiesnax]

There is a UK Petition out already (see link below) to hold a referendum (another one!) to decide whether to abolish the House of Lords - already has 138K+ signatures and will be debated in the House of Commons in June.

I'm surprised they are going to debate this; usually these are ignored with some narrative to dismiss the need for a debate.

https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions/209433

 

[Doon frae Troon]

...or an appropriate level of humour?

I shall agree that some of the stuff that you post is quite hilarious.

 

[SwingsitlikeHogan]

I agree but I find the current system offensive. Other countries manage to balance the main chamber without such a antiquated system. I'm sure we could manage to find an alternative.

How many countries have a 'first past the post' system for the main chamber?

I'm sure we could find an alternative also. But I would want an alternative that would be mandated to prevent the main chamber enacting legislation that might not be 'for the best' in the long term - the sort of legislation that governments put in place simply to address short term political pressures and issues.