Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 20 of 24

Thread: House of lords

  1. #1
    So what do we think, do we want politically elected members, who are elected from a list controlled by the partys for 15 years, so you can`t vote them out. or stay with some birth right and people who the government likes and so appoint them as a peer. its all a bit of a mess really, also it will cost around 2 billion to do, the governmnet say its not that expensive, but one of the lords came up with this figure as he used the cost of an MP minus 1/3. as he says, will the member of the house pf lords not get corespondants from his area, the poeple who elected him, and is he not to be expcected to respond and so need staff to manage this.

  2. #2
    Baron von Grinder(Thick as mincer)
    Guest
    Who cares?Let them get on with it as it is as I see no advantage to change other than to prove some sort of communist/socialist point.

  3. #3
    Senior Member X Commie's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2004
    Posts
    9,631
    Those that give the most money to his Tony-Ness should get in.The other peasants are clearly too stupid or inbred to make decisions.Oh, wait..... thats not reform is it?

  4. #4
    personally i like the slightly less politiacl side of the lords, with the ability to not be controlled by the government of the day, as the ruling government can always push through laws and such but it does make them look bad. so its can't block the elected government, just hinder, something which is usefull and right when you have theses parties with massive majorities and constanly changing manifests.

  5. #5
    Senior Member JohnG's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2004
    Posts
    16,849
    Republican Baron. Democracy has nothing to do with communism and little to do with socialism. What good do they do apart from slow down and dilute democracy? Get rid of the lot of them and let MPs do the debating.

  6. #6
    Baron von Grinder(Thick as mincer)
    Guest
    But I dont trust MP's

  7. #7
    Senior Member JohnG's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2004
    Posts
    16,849
    Well vote for one you do then and if there isn't one stand yourself.

  8. #8
    Baron von Grinder(Thick as mincer)
    Guest
    they slow down and dilute MP's secret agendas and give the public the oppertunity to digest the more unpopular ideas before they get pushed through any way.A little bit of good old fashioned stubborness never hurt any one that needs reminding that their agenda isnt theirs but is actually the public they serve.

  9. #9
    is it the old truthbe careful of anyone who wants a position of power, and be glad for those who have power thrust apon them.ie is it better to be someone who being a lord is an obligation, not a choice, and so they see it as there moral obligation to do a decent god and keep the government in check, do the right thing etc or trust someone who wants the power and so may end up abusing it. personally i don`t trust most of the labour lot, more torie then torie and just so slimey!

  10. #10
    Senior Member JohnG's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2004
    Posts
    16,849
    Funny but I hadn't noiced the Lords objecting to any measures that favour the stinking rich but I have noticed them blocking common-sense proposals that might improve the lot of some members of joe public.

  11. #11
    Senior Member JohnG's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2004
    Posts
    16,849
    Typical.

  12. #12
    Senior Member Eddie's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2004
    Posts
    1,724
    A large contingent of the lords are people of knowledge, top scientists, judges, leaders of the respective churches etc, and as such are far better suited to judge on aspects of law, science, religion etc that the government is trying to control.The Labour government has abolished the hereditary peerage, which I personnally thought was a good idea, but I don't think an entirely elected house of lords is a good idea as we will lose all that knowledge from the processes of our government.

  13. #13
    Baron von Grinder(Thick as mincer)
    Guest
    There is none that I trust!They are politicians and by that they are automaticaly untrustworthy.Politicians have far to much influence on my life which IMO is wrong if I didn't vote/agree to have them there in the first place.Jobs like mine for example have now become bitches to politicians targets in order to win votes.Politics is a business now not a public service.

  14. #14
    Senior Member Stephanos Wephanos's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2004
    Location
    Over there
    Posts
    16,388
    A true democracy shouldn't not have heriditary peers or people appointed by HRH Tony Blair because they came up with some reddies for the labour party.There should be some form of voting but not along party lines (if that is possible).And as for public duty, the house of lords is empty most of the time.
    Shirker in Chief

  15. #15
    Baron von Grinder(Thick as mincer)
    Guest
    Id rather have some form of polarisation other wise these people will just walk all over us and get away with murder!Labour dont take the peers seriously which just stinks of as much pomp as they seem to accuse the other of

  16. #16
    Senior Member Stephanos Wephanos's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2004
    Location
    Over there
    Posts
    16,388
    If there is an upper house though it should be a stop check for dodgy laws and politicians (like Blair and Thatcher before) to ensure that laws and policy that push thier own agenda and egos are stopped. There should be no whip etc.
    Shirker in Chief

  17. #17
    Why don't they choose people like they do a jury... but for a year of three or somat?

  18. #18
    Senior Member JohnG's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2004
    Posts
    16,849
    Those nice humane people in Brussels have been limiting the lord's excesses for years anyhow. However the democratically elected Frogs are the ones that get their knuckles rapped the most.

  19. #19
    Senior Member JohnG's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2004
    Posts
    16,849
    The Lords eulogies regarding the police force make nauseous reading Baron. I'd post a link but it might make Ding feel sick.

  20. #20
    Senior Member Mustrum Ridcully - Kicking Against The Pricks's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2004
    Location
    Unseen University
    Posts
    16,670
    I strongly believe that we need a second chamber, because when a government has a very strong majority the second chamber is often the only thing that can act as a brake" to governments just pushing bills through. As to the method of selection, well I don't know, but an elected second house would surely be more representative that the system of appointment by the PM that we have now."
    SIMMERING CAULDRON OF RAGE

Similar Threads

  1. Who's best for house insurance?
    By wee dunc in forum Soapbox
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: 18-11-08, 11:55
  2. Doc in the House
    By Jonathan Greer in forum Riding
    Replies: 13
    Last Post: 06-09-04, 06:57
  3. Is it my house..
    By Al (one is never enough) Leigh in forum Soapbox
    Replies: 37
    Last Post: 03-10-02, 19:33
  4. I can see my house from here...
    By Craig Furber in forum Soapbox
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: 30-09-02, 07:12
  5. MOVING HOUSE
    By alan carson in forum Riding
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 01-01-70, 00:00

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •