The House of Lords. Because I didn’t vote for Melvyn Bragg or Andrew Lloyd Weber or Sir Chumley Incontinent.
Nevertheless, the HoL has time and again proven itself to be an effective buffer against the worst excesses of Parliament. Your cockpunch has been rescinded.
11 Likes
Left without a secure cabinet. Like Theresa.
No it’s an outdated anachronism which needs to be abolished. Unless you like deferential tugging on an ermine robe.
I’d even vote LibDem just to see it happen.
I do think there needs to be a second chamber that’s able to take a more long term view on matters. Not quite sure what to replace it with though (like you I dislike the notion of hereditary peers and Bishops being in the Lords).
M’eh. I’ll put up with the anachronisms because they rarely mis-step in practice.
1 Like
Agreed. It screams out for democratic reform and lends itself to a non constituency based form of PR.
How many other countries have second chambers populated largely by prime ministerial patronage, heteditary class privilege and religious appointments (also largely made by the prime minister).
1 Like
And it’s un PC. It should be The House of Lords and Ladies.
We should replace it with people who have engaged in physical violence on the Jeremy Kyle show. It would be all win.
1 Like
All forms of second chamber can be criticised for their flaws. Elected second chambers are either impotent (in which case what are the chances of getting the electorate to take an interest - it’s hard enough to get them to vote for the people who actually do have the power !) or they really can contradict the first chamber, in which case things sooner or later end up in the gridlocked nightmare which is US politics.
On balance I prefer something like the current system, if only on the basis of ‘biodiversity’ i.e. if you can incorporate as many different ways of looking at a problem into your system then you maximise your chances of finding a good solution. I’d make the appointments less political though and I’d impose a minimum (probably a pretty low minimum, but at least something) by way of attendance and contribution for continued membership. I’d definitely preserve the current arrangement where the second chamber ultimately concedes to the elected one. Politicians need to own their decisions and not to be able to hide behind reversals inflicted by someone else.
VB
2 Likes
A much smaller, fully elected and full-time second chamber would be a good start. With powers decided by the Commons. Any sort of hanging onto the present system would just be a fudge.
You’re a fudge.
1 Like
I’m not sure on the “powers decided by the Commons bit”, it feels like a recipe for disaster, but I also don’t have a better suggestion!
One thing I do like in the US system is that Senators hold a term for 6 years, but elections are held every 2, but only ever for a third of the Senate at any one time. I think it helps stop crazy swings too far one way or the other.
2 Likes
smaller isn’t better - in fact it could be narrow and insular. I don’t mind large, elected is fine…but only if the elections are not entirely categorised by political alliances. The 2nd house needs a broad range of expertise, knowledge and experience to temper the lower. I include representatives of the recognized religions.
1 Like
Agree with trying to avoid party political alliances, but I don’t believe religion of any kind has any place in the process of government.
3 Likes
Completely agree, but that’s the hard part - how to avoid the election/selection being along political lines.
Well, that’s what we elect them to do, and some of the time they even do it reasonably well! The Lords are voting for a new hereditary peer this month and the list of candidates is all hereditary Lords. As they do.
Personally I like small government - and our unelected house is only second in size to China’s unelected rubber-stamping government. So some slimming down would I think be a good thing.
Yes, I think a fixed size would be sensible. It seems that every PM tries to stuff in more people to try and swing the balance in their favour, which just gets rather silly after a while.
It already is political. It’s the terms of reference that dictate the behaviour of the second chamber. I suspect a regional based PR system would encourage independents to stand along with experts in their field. Electing members to a second chamber would also help clarify the role of the second chamber.
1 Like