Should the House of Lords be elected.
Or should it still be appointed?
|
What do you think?
And why?
|
I have a doubt either way.
I think the House of Lords shoud be part appointed and part elected.
I do not think appointed members should be hereditary peers.
I believe they should be Life peers.
I would elect about 400 members and have 200 members appointed.
|
I don't think there should be a House of Lords
|
"I would elect about 400 members and have 200 members appointed."
Don't the rest of us have a say?
|
The HOL should have no life peers or hereditary peers. They should all be elected and for a set period of time.
It certainly shouldn't be an old folks home where dusty old farts fall asleep and claim expenses for the privilege.
|
>> The HOL should have no life peers or hereditary peers. They should all be elected and for a set period of time.
>> It certainly shouldn't be an old folks home where dusty old farts fall asleep and claim expenses for the privilege.
Perhaps it should be a nursery where silly little tarts jump up and down wittering about how the ancient State they don't understand 'should' be organised.
I find it hard to resist making offensive posts. It's a word thing. Apologies to the Nameless One who is of course perfectly OK in my book (even if a bit wrong sometimes - who isn't after all?).
|
>> I find it hard to resist making offensive posts. It's a word thing.
On that basis, then, I'd elect you, AC, to stir things up a bit in the HOL.
:-)
|
>> I'd elect you, AC, to stir things up a bit in the HOL.
>> :-)
Doubtless you forget, JB, that people are not elected to the upper house.
And I alas am qualified neither by birth nor by achievement to perch my skinny hams on the red benches. The nation doesn't know what it's missing. Just as well because we don't want mass suicide do we?
I mean, gotta keep the productive forces going, knowImean?
(Huge s*it-eating smirk).
|
Tell me, Geoff fluffy, what first attracted someone mainly interested in politics, history and economics to an obscure, backwater motoring forum, mostly used by a handful of long-term, opinionated, easily wound-up old farts?
|
A friend introduced me to Car4play.
|
Sorry I ever doubted you.*
*Not
|
If you started with a blank sheet of paper you'd never get the current arrangement. Actually though, it works pretty well. It's constrained from blocking major items promised in a manifesto and constrained in many, maybe too many, other ways. It can though make the elected house think again about more extreme or impractical proposals. The large number of cross benchers and people with expertise in areas outside mainstream politics also add another dimension.
Much more interesting to watch from gallery or listen to on live stream then the monkey house with green benches.
For all the fuss about oldies cashing in on attendance allowances very many members go on attending and contributing daily until they drop. Lord Newton of Braintree was an example of the latter, a busy man in the Lords regularly until a week or two before his death. Members of its Secondary Legislation Scrutiny Committee are also assiduous in holding Minsters and their Civil Servants to Account.
|
I think Alice Cooper should be elected
|
With 3rd Earl Attlee a hereditary peer do you think he should be allowed to sit in the House of Lords and make decisions about our lives.
|
If it were elected on the same basis as the Commons then it's political balance would be no different, and that would be pointless and not fullfilling the function of being a check on the other house.
If it were elected but with its elections out of sync with the Commons then they would always be at loggerheads, because the Lords would always reflect the balance at the last general election but one.
There are other elements to a democracy than simple knee-jerk vote-counting on a particular day, and other forces and concerns that do not always coincide with the rather crude left/right swings as reflected in the commons. So ideally perhaps the Lords should be representative of other focus groups and power centres:- perhaps regional, religious, businss, trade unions, arts, media, environmental, human rights, etc, and should in some way contain people of worth and stature from those areas, selected on some basis other than simple mass-appeal elections?
But those arguing in favour of a simple election process must realise that if you legitimise the democratic credentials of the Lords then you are also legitimising their right sometimes to overturn decisions made by the Commons, even election mandated ones.
|
The fact the House of Lords exists also goes to moderate the more wild political issues.
Suppose a party got elected on about three issues, but buried deep within their manifesto was a promise to introduce legislation to ban goats. The fact the Lords would slow such a thing down I think most would agree is a good thing.
The absence of a second chamber, or one which just reflected the elected party at the time would leave all goats sleepless at night. Kristallnacht anyone?
When the Nazis came for the communists,
I remained silent;
I was not a communist.
When they locked up the social democrats,
I remained silent;
I was not a social democrat.
When they came for the trade unionists,
I did not speak out;
I was not a trade unionist.
When they came for the Jews,
I remained silent;
I wasn't a Jew.
When they came for me,
there was no one left to speak out.
Martin Niemoller
|
"The fact the House of Lords exists ........."
I'm not sure that we need 800+ of the rascals though.
|
If they are sensible decisions about our lives why not?
Our lives are affected by a minority government just a thought.
|
>>
>> Our lives are affected by a minority government just a thought.
>>
Not this government. They have an overall majority.
|
The present Government got 36% of the vote on a 65% turnout.
|
>> The present Government got 36% of the vote on a 65% turnout.
>>
Yep.
That is a majority isn't it.
How democracy works.
If the 35% who didn't vote had voted, things may have been different. But they didn't.
Casting a ballot should be compulsory. Even if you spoil it.
|
I was reliably informed that at the previous PCC ballot, the number of spoiled papers exceeded the votes for the winning candidate.
I spoiled mine as did several of my friends... I know one of the candidates. It's a joke.
|
>> I was reliably informed that at the previous PCC ballot, the number of spoiled papers
>> exceeded the votes for the winning candidate.
Aren't figures for spoiled papers announced as part of the results at elections?
tinyurl.com/h334yng
It seems that electors North of Watford weren't bright enough to understand the ballot paper.
|
Even if you spoil it.
>>
I know we've done this before, but I don't see what benefit spoiled ballot papers bring.
|
Exercise walking to the polling station
|
And my dog seems to enjoy peeing on the A board outside
|
You could gain similar exercise walking to the pub. Arguably more interesting as well.
|
>> I know we've done this before, but I don't see what benefit spoiled ballot papers
>> bring.
(1) To explicitly say 'none of the above' as aprt of the turnout
(2) As part of an organised protest.
|
>> >> I know we've done this before, but I don't see what benefit spoiled ballot
>> papers
>> >> bring.
>>
>> (1) To explicitly say 'none of the above' as aprt of the turnout
>> (2) As part of an organised protest.
>>
I don't think anyone takes any notice of that. I'm not aware of their being any such protest ongoing. If there were maybe, but at the moment I think it's pointless.
|
>> I don't think anyone takes any notice of that. I'm not aware of their being
>> any such protest ongoing. If there were maybe, but at the moment I think it's
>> pointless.
I'm not aware of anything current either, though I've a vague recollection of something long ago in Northern Ireland. Nonetheless, the potential is there.
I've spoiled in past for first reason.
|
I've spoiled in past for first reason.
>>
Afterwards did you feel listened to? Did you feel it was worthwhile?
|
>> Afterwards did you feel listened to? Did you feel it was worthwhile?
Satisfied. Small protest made. Good enough to justify the hop/skip/jump to the polling station at end of road.
|
Satisfied. Small protest made. Good enough to justify the hop/skip/jump to the polling station at
>> end of road.
Fair enough, each to their own.
|
>> The present Government got 36% of the vote on a 65% turnout.
>>
A minority government is one that does not have an overall majority in the House of Commons.
That's how a representative democracy works.
|
>> With 3rd Earl Attlee a hereditary peer do you think he should be allowed to
>> sit in the House of Lords and make decisions about our lives.
Why focus on Attlee rather than the other 89 hereditaries that remain?
He does look like his Grandfather though.
|
I am not just focusing on Attlee.
My quibb about Earl Attlee is that he sits on the Conservative benches.
His Grandfather was one of the greatest Prime Ministers that ever lived.
And Clement Attlee was a socialist.
|
Under Clement Attlee the National Health Service and welfare state was rapidly expanded.
|
>> I am not just focusing on Attlee.
Unless I'm missing something between flat and threaded view you asked a question about the current Lord Attlee 'out of the blue'.
While I agree with you about Clem's stature as PM and his being a Socialist I'm not clear why that binds his grandson.
Do you share your Grandad's politics?
Last edited by: Bromptonaut on Fri 13 May 16 at 21:52
|
>> I am not just focusing on Attlee.
>>
>> My quibb about Earl Attlee is that he sits on the Conservative benches.
Actually he sits on three hundred quid a day, for every day on which he bothers to sign in - even for a few minutes. (As do they all.)
I'd sit down there for a potential £1500 a week.
|
There was a boy at my last school called Attlee, a grandson I think of the prime minister but not the present earl who is 18 years younger than me, while the harmless, modest Attlee at school would have been just three or four years younger at most.
At a Catholic public school whose politics tended towards extreme reaction, he was known quite kindly as 'Clem' and not bullied or persecuted any more than usual, a bit surprisingly as that place had some pretty spectacular ruffians.
|
I was too slow adding: young 'Clem' had no side at all but stood his ground, so was generally respected by all but the most crass (as far as I could see from the great height of my age and academic eminence).
I suspect many today would be left open-mouthed by the vulgarly reactionary impression given by the parents on exeat days. The fifties: the cash-rich living it up after the years of austerity or simulated austerity. WW2 has a lot to answer for.
|
Is Lord Archer still attending?
|
I do not know if Lord Archer still attends the House of Lords.
He is still writing books though I think.
|
still nicking other people's ideas, you mean?
|
>> Or should it still be appointed?
It should be done on the same basis as jury service - random selection, but subject to an intelligence filter.
The hereditary system was a reasonable proxy for this. In some ways preferable to political patronage.
I am not in favour of 'general elections' for the upper chamber. If members are to be elected then it should be for life.
|
It should be done on the same basis as jury service - random selection
people peers?
|
It is of course, quite ridiculous that there are more "jobs for the good old boys & girls" (over 800 isn't it?) as appointees in the Lords than there are elected members in the HoC.
|
>> It is of course, quite ridiculous that there are more "jobs for the good old
>> boys & girls" (over 800 isn't it?) as appointees in the Lords than there are
>> elected members in the HoC.
Why?
|
It is getting a bit daft with the numbers of them, 800 ? There can't be many 'houses' around the world that are that big, even taking into different types of government it's alot.
|
The concept of "Peers", "Lords" et al, belongs to the Middle Ages "serfdom model" than to the UK's universal suffrage of the 21st Century.
They ain't, any of 'em, a Lord of mine!
|
800 Lords?
I remember John Prescott we used to have a natter over 40 years ago.He had a old Jag then.Lord John.>:)
|
Yes, about 800, against about 650 Commons members, the only top-heavy bicameral system in the world.
|
The House of Commons is to go from 650 members down to 600 members.
The House of Lords is still going to have over 800 members.
|
>> Yes, about 800, against about 650 Commons members, the only top-heavy bicameral system in the
>> world.
After the removal of the hereditary peers it was about the same size as the commons. Since then governments of both stripes have appointed younger 'working' peers. Cameron has appointed approx 180 since 2010.
Given the appointments are for life (although I believe it's now possible to 'retire') easy to see how the numbers grow.
Reform seems to be permanently in the 'too difficult' box.
|
>> Given the appointments are for life (although I believe it's now possible to 'retire') easy
>> to see how the numbers grow.
Exactly. Except to the extent that they retire, unless you want the average age to be 85 not 69, then they need to be more or less continually appointed.
>>
>> Reform seems to be permanently in the 'too difficult' box.
And so it should be perhaps. The times when a government most wants to reform the HoL are quite possibly the times when it is doing something useful.
I'm happy for it to stay in the "better things to do" box, unless I can get in. I quite fancy a go at Lording.
Last edited by: Manatee on Sat 14 May 16 at 18:31
|
What is wrong having an appointed chamber as well as having an elected chamber.
Our House of Parliament have worked well since 1265.
Why change the structure of our democracy now after all this time to keep a few people happy.
|
>> What is wrong having an appointed chamber as well as having an elected chamber.
>>
>> Our House of Parliament have worked well since 1265.
>>
>> Why change the structure of our democracy now after all this time to keep a
>> few people happy
That's why should vote "Leave" in the E.U referendum.
|
If we Vote Leave on 23rd June 2016 will our democracy survive in its present form.
I would rather have an unelected House of Lords than a European Parliament as it stands now.
What do other forum members think?
Do I have a point?
|
>> I would rather have an unelected House of Lords than a European Parliament as it
>> stands now.
False dichotomy alert.
|
>> False dichotomy alert.
Not really - I don't think his fluffiness is presenting a dichotomy, so it can't be a false one. They are certainly not mutually exclusive as we have both.
But I'm not a real philosopher.
|
I am being as genuine as I can be.
|
A wonderfully ambiguous comment. Any politician would be proud of that.
|
>> A wonderfully ambiguous comment. Any politician would be proud of that.
>>
Out of the mouths of .....
If someone notable had said that it would have passed into the language - a classic.
|
What is going to be interesting, fluff, is what the turnout for in or out of Europe will be.
Will it be like local government/council elections? (ie very small)
Or like national elections? (65%, by your figures)
Because we will probably see the guys who bitch and moan the most after the fact are the guys who couldn't be bothered getting of their backsides and standing in a queue to cast their vote.
IF democracy was done by a site-at-home-and-vote-with-the-red-button, like on some of those reality TV dross-fests like Big Brother, would it make a difference?
(By the way, I stood for four hours in the rain back in 1994 to cast my vote in the first democratic elections here. Let me tell you the story one day.)
Last edited by: Ian (Cape Town) on Sat 14 May 16 at 21:56
|
Should the House of Lords be an elected chamber.
Over 700 peers in the House of lords are appointed.
I am becoming confused what is the best way.
Over 90 peers are hereditary.
|
>> Cross reference the E.U. referendum debate!
Makes point tha tmuch of recent growth is Cameron packing the HoL with Tories.
|
I could not agree with you more.
Cameron is packing the House of Lords with life peers for the Conservatives.
|
>> I could not agree with you more.
>>
>> Cameron is packing the House of Lords with life peers for the Conservatives.
Tony Blair created 357 life peers.
David Cameron has created 237.
|
I do not class Tony Blair a socialist.
At least David Cameron is honest about his philosophy.
|
>> I do not class Tony Blair a socialist.
>>
>>
Neither is the parliamentary Labour party, and apart from a few diehards it hasn't been for years. It is the party of the middle class left.
|
The Conservatives under David Cameron straddle the centre ground of British politics.
There is no where for Labour to go other than the far left.
In other words Labour at present are unelectable.
|
>> The Conservatives under David Cameron straddle the centre ground of British politics.
That's what they would like us to believe. In practice they're using the supposed financial crisis and austerity to do stuff Thatcher only dreamed of.
|
Name me a few things Cameron is doing what Margaret Thatcher would never have done.
I am curious what your answers are.
|
>> Name me a few things Cameron is doing what Margaret Thatcher would never have done.
Increasing privatisation of the NHS
Near abolition of social housing
Removal of various disability benefits
Referendum on EU
|
I fully agree on everything that you have just written.
|
>> Near abolition of social housing
>>
I was talking with a disabled friend this morning, he has a council bungalow which is being adapted to his needs, a wet room, ramps, and several other improvements which he undodoubtably needs. When the work is complete he will buy it.
|
I do not blame your disabled friend to buy his council bungalow.
I would do the same.
|
I wonder how many peers support the Vote Leave campaign.
|
I think that's about half, that's about par with the rest of the population.
|
There should be no more than 600 peers on the House of Lords.
What do other forum members think.
At the moment there are 659 M.P.s in the House of Commons.
By 2020 that will be going down to 600 M.P.s in the House of Commons.
|
As above, I don't see any real logic in argument that Lords membership cannot be greater than that of Commons.
Might be different in a reformed second chamber that was wholly or partly elected. More certainly so with members who were, like the Commons, full time/salaried. While however we have second chamber largely comprised of peripatetic experts etc it seems OK.
|
I think there should be a limit though, I can't pretend to know every in and out of how the HoL work, but on a basic level each PM deciding to fill them with their own lot with no real limit does seem something that needs sorting. Where do we stop, 1000?
|
587 would seem to be ideal.
|
We need a third chamber, The House of Low Life Scum. Made up of people with criminal convictions.
Every strata of society is entitled to a voice.
|
>> We need a third chamber, The House of Low Life Scum. Made up of people
>> with criminal convictions.
>>
There's enough of those in the present two.
|
The ideal for me would be a membership in the Lords of about 450 members.
|
Because I would have the 450 members elected and not appointed.
|
You need another 137 to make it work properly.
|
One thing both houses need is a proper attendance requirement. How often do you put on the Parliament channel (er - not often for me :-) )and there is some guys giving his speech to a handful of MPs? Then they are all summonsed at voting time, and haven't really heard any arguments for or against.
400 with 90% attendance would be better than 800 with 10% IMO.
|
Most votes are along party lines, so automatic. The MPs don't have to be there.
You only see a packed house when the issue being debated has aroused popular interest, or when a struggle is going on between the parties. Surprise results are very rare.
|
>> You only see a packed house when the issue being debated has aroused popular interest,
>> or when a struggle is going on between the parties.
Or when they are discussing their pay rise !
|
Or when they are trying to save their jobs.
|
I have received my poll card today.
Cant wait to vote next month.
What is more than it said than the unelected House of Lord.
|
You know that the Prime Minister is not elected, right?
|
>> You know that the Prime Minister is not elected, right?
>>
In a way, he is; ironically of course given the subject, by his peers.
|
Well, true. But not by the people.
|
>> Well, true. But not by the people.
>>
He has to be elected by his constituents first nowadays; although that was probably not the case in the days of hereditary peers in the Victorian era. Which does give the common herd a chance to have their say.
After all, we don't get a chance to choose other ministers either, and the PM is effectively "primus inter pares", first amongst equals hence the title of Jeffrey Archer's novel.
|
"hereditary peers in the Victorian era."
Alec Douglas-Home was sitting in the House of Lords when appointed as Prime Minister in 1963.
|
>>
>> "hereditary peers in the Victorian era."
>>
>> Alec Douglas-Home was sitting in the House of Lords when appointed as Prime Minister in
>> 1963.
>>
Indeed; but he had previously been an MP and had many years of experience at the highest levels of government. For all that he was pereceived as being an old fossil, he did a huge amount of good both for the Conservative party and also the "man in the street", his most outstanding contribution bein g the abolition of resale price maintenance. He was also astute enough to realise that party leaders had to be elected rather than appointed if they were to maintain public confidence, a lesson lost on the likes of Blair and Brown.
|
The Marquesse of Salsibury was Prime Minister and he was unelected as well.
|
He would have support Brexit though. Throughout his this career his overriding policy was to avoid all alliances with other European over and pursue a policy of isolation for Great Britain
|
Britain could stand alone in those days. It was the most powerful country in Europe, probably the world. Things have slipped a bit since then.
|
We have only slipped from one to five.
And that is in 110 years.
|
>> We have only slipped from one to five.
>>
>> And that is in 110 years.
>>
Yep, better than Norwich City
|
Those were the days. Fog in channel. Continent cut off.
|
Elections have changed though
Quote from Marquess of Salisbury.
"The days and weeks of screwed-up smiles and laboured courtesy, the mock geniality, the hearty shake of the filthy hand, the chuckling reply that must be made to the coarse joke, the loathsome, choking compliment that must be paid to the grimy wife and sluttish daughter, the indispensable flattery of the vilest religious prejudices, the wholesale deglutition of hypocritical pledges"
|
>> "The days and weeks of screwed-up smiles and laboured courtesy, the mock geniality, the hearty
>> shake of the filthy hand, the chuckling reply that must be made to the coarse
>> joke, the loathsome, choking compliment that must be paid to the grimy wife and sluttish
>> daughter, the indispensable flattery of the vilest religious prejudices, the wholesale deglutition of hypocritical pledges"
>>
>>
I bet Tony Blair had exactly the same thoughts.
|
Does Tony Blair deserve an Earldom.
Clement Attlee was awarded an Earldom in 1955.
|
>> Does Tony Blair deserve an Earldom.
No
Next?
|
Arthur James Balfour was awarded an Earldom in 1922.
He was Prime Minister between 1902 and 1905.
|
Lots of former prime ministers have been granted peerages:-
tinyurl.com/jttaa5t
Last edited by: Duncan on Tue 24 May 16 at 21:00
|
So hav jazz musicians.
Earl Hines, Count Basie, Duke Ellington ......
|
>> He was Prime Minister between 1902 and 1905.
I wouldn't waste too much time googling former PMs progress to Earldoms Fluffs.
Excepting Ramsay MacDonald, Churchill & those dying in/within days of being released from harness it was a prize on retirement. Eden was last to get on as he left number 10.
Macmillan got one but had to wait twenty+ years.
Last edited by: Bromptonaut on Tue 24 May 16 at 21:12
|
>>
>> Macmillan was very last but had to wait twenty+ years.
>>
What about The Blessed Margaret?
|
Mrs Thatchers husband was awarded a Baronet 1990.
|
I made a spelling error before.
Mrs Thatchers husband was awarded a Baronet in 1990.
|
>> Mrs Thatchers husband was awarded a Baronet in 1990.
Giving Mark a K directly was too much even for Maggie...
|
>> What about The Blessed Margaret?
Life Peer as were Wilson and Callaghan. The others were hereditary.
One assumes that Major, Blair and Brown declined life peerages as did Heath.
|
Harold Macmillan became the Earl of Stockton in 1984.
|
Swift editing, Brompy, but not swift enough!
|
>> Swift editing, Brompy, but not swift enough!
Which edit?
|
>> >> Swift editing, Brompy, but not swift enough!
>>
>>
>> Which edit?
>>
From:-
>> Macmillan was very last but had to wait twenty+ years.
To:-
>> Macmillan got one but had to wait twenty+ years.
No worries, it's only a detail.
:-)
|
>> No worries, it's only a detail.
>>
>> :-)
Fluffy mentioned Earldoms. Supermac was last to get one of those. Wislon and after got life jobbies. So did Home but like Quentin Hogg he's an outlier having previously disclaimed a hereditary title.
|
It was Joseph Chamberlain who split the Unionist Coalition in 1902 over Tariff Reform.
He also split the Liberal Party in 1886 over Irish Home Rule.
He never sat in the House of Lords.
Joseph Chamberlain created the Liberal Unionist Party in 1886 due to Gladstone wanting Irish Home Rule.
In other words Joseph Chamberlain was never offered a peerage to sit in the House of Lords.
|
Is this a potted history lesson fluffy or are you trying to stimulate a discussion?
|
He's just discovered Google.
|
>> He's just discovered Google.
>>
More likely watches Pointless. Apt really. ;-)
|
He seems to be posting more now that the Flying Scotsman has returned to its shed on Sodor.
Puff puff.
|
I am trying to stimulate a discussion.
Thats all.
|
>> I am trying to stimulate a discussion.
>>
>> Thats all.
>>
For all the P taking you get, your threads do generate a lot of posts so you are certainly doing that.
|
Who got the last Earldom being Prime Minister.
I am interested that is all.
|
Google is your friend, have a look there, that's what we would do if we wanted to know that.
|
"Who got the last Earldom being Prime Minister."
Discussed higher up the thread, Fluffo.
In the words of John Lennon, it was "Sir Harrods McMillion".
|
The 16th Earl of Warwick died in the Battle of Barnet in 1471.
Silly to fight over a haircut really.
|
He was born a bit too early to be a Whig wasn't he?
|
Sir Anthony Eden became the Earl of Avon in 1961.
The 2nd Earl died with no heir.
The Earldom of Avon is now extinct.
|
>> The 2nd Earl died with no heir
Probably hereditary. Baldness mostly is.
|
The 2nd Earl of Avon died of AIDS.
|
>> The 2nd Earl of Avon died of AIDS.
And?
|
>> Probably hereditary. Baldness mostly is.
>>
Have a look at your maternal grandfather is you want to see how much hair you are going to keep when you get older.
|
>> Have a look at your maternal grandfather is you want to see how much hair
>> you are going to keep when you get older.
>>
How's that? Did he leave you his syrup in the will? ;-)
|
>> Have a look at your maternal grandfather is you want to see how much hair
>> you are going to keep when you get older.
He died aged 45 (60 Woodbines a day coupled with my grandmother's appalling, salt drenched "cooking" will do that to you) with a thick mop of black, curly hair (Malteser, you see sir). Very much doubt he'd have baldened.
I'm now 46 with a thinning crown of rapidly whitening ginger.
My paternal grandfather, a fellow redhead, died in his mid sixties with what he described as a "flea ice-skating rink" on his bonce. I fear I may suffer his fate rather than the other, should I be fortunate enough to age much further. Hat time approaches.
I think your hypothesis may not apply to everyone.
|
>> >>
>> I think your hypothesis may not apply to everyone.
>>
There is of course always the exception to every rule.
Did your granddad have a bike?
|
Which one?
And don't speak about my grandmother like that.
;-)
|
All my grandad could afford was a bike.
|
My grandad had a full head of hair.
|
I do not own a mountain bike.
I either walk or use the bus.
|
Get well Duke of Edinburgh.
|
I've met him once 40 years ago.He took the micky out of a few fitters who stood before me.
Sharp with strong blue eyes the German type.
|
i think both the house of lord and commons need to be replaced by the house of upper tier which consists of experts and the lower tier which consist of representives of the people, politics excluded from both houses sane mature level headed discussions on todays topics and
voting done unamiously
politics is a waste of breath issue decided on the panel and measures voted like a refrendum
to the common person, at least that way we the public are consulted and our views noted
tax payers money what is spent to be decided annually by the public, in a refrendum, on a local basis
Due to modern technology teleconferencing no need to pay mps 2nd houses also no need to subsidise as they need to be aware of common issues and not be out of touch
|
>>>>
>> tax payers money what is spent to be decided annually by the public, in a
>> refrendum, on a local basis
>>
>>
What could possibly go wrong with that?
|
The teleconferencing is an interesting one. When I worked in a bak we more or less lived on teleconference calls. I struggled to believe how much money each call cost, given the daily rate of the participants.
However SWMBO does the rail bookings for people at her small office of a not-much-larger company, and despite having teleconferencing they still truck up to London and the Midlands for meetings, apparently teleconferencing is seen as not really very productive and much better meeting face to face.
I wonder that the experts in Sajid's 2nd house are expert in...?
|
Prince Philip is 95 years old on the 10th June this year.
He was born in 1921.
|
He is a good age fluffy.Mind you he will have never had any stress about paying the bills or getting up in the morning to make a living.
|
>> Mind you he will have never had any stress about paying the bills or getting up in the morning to make a living.
Don't forget he's an old sailor Dutchie. I bet he gets up earlier than I do.
|
You could be right he is a strong character.Problaby does as he is told like the rest of us.>:)
|
At 95 he looks as fit as a fiddle.
|
The Dukedom of Marlborough can be inherited on the female line as well as the male line.
It might not be relevant but its just a thought.
Our monarch was the eldest child of a King.
|
>> Our monarch was the eldest child of a King.
>>
Actually that's not particularly unusual in the UK.
|
>> Actually that's not particularly unusual in the UK.
Neither is fact that her Father was not the eldest. The manner of Edward VIII's going was unusual though.
|
>> Actually that's not particularly unusual in the UK.
>>
Not uncommon but I make it that only only six of the twelve monarchs of the United Kingdom qualify.
|
Our monarch was the eldest child of the Duke of York.
The Duke of York became King George VI.
Princess Elizabeth became Queen Elizabeth II.
|
Even if we leave the EU there will still be the House of Commons and House of Lords.
|
No there won't. There was a political and legally binding commitment in the original charter for joining the EU that when we leave we have to replace the Houses with an EU approved style of hierarchical management based on an unelected representation of the esoterically Catholic.
|
So what will we have instead?
Who will make our laws?
|
The usual Government but everything will be subject to review by the esoterically Catholic. How can you vote for Leave without knowing this?
|
I can't see that happening FM.
If the UK votes for Brexit all cards are off the table.Nothing will change regarding the politics in the UK.Problaby a general election and a dog fight in the Tory party.
|
Dutchie, even the Outies have don't know what will happen in the event of a vote to leave. I am quite sure that I have no idea.
Last edited by: No FM2R on Thu 2 Jun 16 at 20:32
|
I agree it is all up in the air.People will vote with their harts I'm afraid and what will happen is anybody's guess.
I try to see it from the Continental and British vieuw and it is difficult.You have as much idea as me problaby more.
|
twelve monarchs of
>> the United Kingdom .
>>
?
United Kingdom created in 1801.
George III, George IV, William IV, Victoria, Edward VII, George V, Edward VIII, George VI, Elizabeth II, = 9
|
Waiting for someone to spot that:-)
Meant to say of course Great Britain and the United Kingdom
|
United Kingdom was created in 1801 when Ireland became part of the Union.
It was Ireland until 1921 when Northern Ireland became part of the Union kingdom.
Southern Ireland split from the Union in 1921.
|
Yeah, OK fluffy. Something like that.
There's a bit of old needle certainly, often made explicit in my experience, but the southern Irish are very decent towards the English.
The North is a different matter altogether, not for the faint-hearted. They are tooled up up there.
|
I had an ancester who was born in County Mayo in Southern Ireland.
He was born in the 1870s.
|
In Liverpool there was an Irish Nationalist who represented Liverpool Scotland in the House of Commons.
He was an M.P between 1885 and 1929.
He was the only Irish Nationalist to represent a mainland United Kingdom seat in the House of Commons.
|
The Irishman name was Tip O Conner.
|
Thomas Power O'Connor
Known as Tay Pay on account of his accent.
Last edited by: Bromptonaut on Sun 5 Jun 16 at 20:55
|
The oldest recorded accidental death for an MP was.Ralph Carminowe MP for Cornwall who was pulled over a cliff by a pack of hounds in 1389
Thomas Robinson MP for Helston was gored to death by a a pet bull in 1665
Thomas Whitmore Tory MP for Bridgnorth drowned in a well in his own garden in 1765
Just thought you might all like to know
|
>> Just thought you might all like to know
>>
>>
You forgot the more recent and better-known fate of William Huskisson MP, the first man to die in a railway accident, 15th September 1830.
|
Indeed but we need to remember the less famous too like poor James Mackintosh, Whig MP for Knaresborough who tragically died choking on a chicken bone in 1832. The list is long.
|
I used to have a Irish Terrier.Nice dog always wanted to scrap with other dogs.Must be something in the Irish nature fiery people.
|
The Irish are good at rugby union.
|
>> The Irish are good at rugby union.
>>
Where DO you get these one liners from?
|
I'll let you know on Saturday.
Thanks.
|
>> The Irish are good at rugby union.
>>
They're not too shabby at hurling, either.
Not that any other country plays it.
|
How will U.K. peers vote in the IN/OUT Referendum.
Which way will the hereditary peers vote.
|
>> Which way will the hereditary peers vote.
Although Members of the HoL cannot vote in General Elections they can vote in the referendum.
However I don't see how all 800+ peers together will influence the result, never mind a handful of hereditaries.
|
Another day in the E.U. Referendum.
How will peers vote in the E.U. Referendum.
I do not know.
|
>> I do not know.
I, and I guess others don't really care.
|
A number of opinion polls put Vote Leave ahead.
|
You could be right fluffy exciting times ahead.Vote leave and Farage is our leader.>;)
|
Who would you pick as Prime minister.
Nigel Farage or Boris Johnson.
If Vote Leave win will the United Kingdom Independence Party merge with the Conservative Party and create one centre to right wing political party.
The last time anything like this occured was in 1912 when the Liberal Unionist Party merged with the Conservative Party.
|
>> >> If Vote Leave win will the United Kingdom Independence Party merge with the Conservative Party
>> and create one centre to right wing political party.
>>
>> >>
UKIP is becoming the home of Labour's traditional working class supporters now that party has become the representative of the state employed middle class.
|
UKIP is getting votes from the traditional working class.
These people use to vote Labour.
Where are the Labour votes to come from.
|
>> Where are the Labour votes to come from.
Dumb foreigners, and us lefty intellectuals of course.
Wake up fluffy! UKIP shmukip.
|
UKIP and the Conservatives should just merge and get on with it.
|
I think it's Labour's working class vote that has partly migrated to UKIP leaving it with a higher proportion of middle class intellectuals and teachers, who are the ones who are represented by the leadership. It's they, Labour, who need to merge with UKIP.
They might need to make a few policy adjustments:)
Labour is finished unless and until both the Tories and UKIP drop the ball at the same time. Or unless Labour actually turns into a Labour party and reconnects with the people who should be electing it.
GDP might be increasing, but vast swathes of people are getting poorer. When did we forget that, without some fairly determined and systematic redistribution, the surplus accrues to the capitalist?
|
What are you trying to say, Manatee.
|
Yea, what are you trying to say ;-)
|
I think he wants Vardy to start with Rooney on the bench.
|