News:

And we're back!

Main Menu

UK: No more Lords, please, the House is full

Started by The Larch, April 20, 2011, 07:51:10 AM

Previous topic - Next topic
Print
Go Down Pages1 2
User actions

The Larch

April 20, 2011, 07:51:10 AM
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-13137835

QuoteHouse of Lords full, peers warn David Cameron

David Cameron has been told by a cross-party group of senior peers that the House of Lords is "full" and he must stop creating new members.

The prime minister has created more peers more quickly than any of his post-war predecessors, having ennobled 117 people in less than a year.

The House of Lords now has 792 members who are entitled to attend and vote.

The peers warn that this number is "unsustainable" and is damaging the effectiveness of the Lords.

The warning comes in a report from the independent Constitution Unit at University College London and has been endorsed by 13 peers from all parties.

They include former Cabinet Secretary Lord Butler; former Speaker Baroness Boothroyd; the convenor of the independent crossbenchers, Baroness De Souza; former Labour leader of the Lords Baroness Jay; former Tory Cabinet ministers Lord Forsyth and Lord Mackay of Clashfern; former Labour cabinet minister Lord Adonis; former Liberal leader Lord Steel of Aikwood; and former Master of the Rolls Lord Woolf.

Time for some culling?  :frog:



Valmy

#1
April 20, 2011, 07:56:01 AM
He has created over 100 new Peers?  I just sorta figured they were no longer creating new ones, the whole idea of a peer being sorta outdated.

I guess this is some sort of strategy to keep the HoL voting your way by appointing new ones.  Lame.
Quote"This is a Russian warship. I propose you lay down arms and surrender to avoid bloodshed & unnecessary victims. Otherwise, you'll be bombed."

Zmiinyi defenders: "Russian warship, go fuck yourself."

Valmy

#2
April 20, 2011, 07:59:04 AM
Quote from: The Larch on April 20, 2011, 07:51:10 AM
Time for some culling?  :frog:

I like the way you think citizen  :shifty:
Quote"This is a Russian warship. I propose you lay down arms and surrender to avoid bloodshed & unnecessary victims. Otherwise, you'll be bombed."

Zmiinyi defenders: "Russian warship, go fuck yourself."

Maximus

#3
April 20, 2011, 08:01:38 AM
Seems bizarre to me that the PM has the power to create new lords. What purpose could that possibly serve?

Valmy

#4
April 20, 2011, 08:03:33 AM
Quote from: Maximus on April 20, 2011, 08:01:38 AM
Seems bizarre to me that the PM has the power to create new lords. What purpose could that possibly serve?

I know.  I wonder if one his last day of office he can just name himself a Lord :P.

Logically control over such a largely ceremonial thing should be controlled by the Monarch like in Spain.  I mean what else do the figure heads have to do but create more figure heads?

But I think it is to make sure the House of Lords never becomes a serious independent political power.
Quote"This is a Russian warship. I propose you lay down arms and surrender to avoid bloodshed & unnecessary victims. Otherwise, you'll be bombed."

Zmiinyi defenders: "Russian warship, go fuck yourself."

grumbler

#5
April 20, 2011, 08:05:24 AM
Quote from: Maximus on April 20, 2011, 08:01:38 AM
Seems bizarre to me that the PM has the power to create new lords. What purpose could that possibly serve?
I think the monarch actually ennobles the PM's nominees, rather than the PM directly ennobling them.
The future is all around us, waiting, in moments of transition, to be born in moments of revelation. No one knows the shape of that future or where it will take us. We know only that it is always born in pain.   -G'Kar

Bayraktar!

Valmy

#6
April 20, 2011, 08:06:10 AM
Quote from: grumbler on April 20, 2011, 08:05:24 AM
I think the monarch actually ennobles the PM's nominees, rather than the PM directly ennobling them.

Ah ok that makes sense.
Quote"This is a Russian warship. I propose you lay down arms and surrender to avoid bloodshed & unnecessary victims. Otherwise, you'll be bombed."

Zmiinyi defenders: "Russian warship, go fuck yourself."

Richard Hakluyt

#7
April 20, 2011, 08:06:58 AM
The government submits a list to the Queen and she creates them. Since it is her government she naturally agrees with the list  :)

Eddie Teach

#8
April 20, 2011, 08:07:59 AM
Quote from: The Larch on April 20, 2011, 07:51:10 AM
The peers warn that this number is "unsustainable" and is damaging the effectiveness of the Lords.

:lol:
To sleep, perchance to dream. But in that sleep of death, what dreams may come?

Richard Hakluyt

#9
April 20, 2011, 08:14:37 AM
These are all life peers btw, their titles are not hereditary.

Neil

#10
April 20, 2011, 08:20:26 AM
Quote from: Valmy on April 20, 2011, 07:56:01 AM
He has created over 100 new Peers?  I just sorta figured they were no longer creating new ones, the whole idea of a peer being sorta outdated.
These days, they create life peers, which is the equivalent of a Senator with a lifetime term.  The last hereditary peer created was former PM Harold McMillan in the early 80s.  Since then, no PM has taken the traditional earldom, although some of them have become life peers (Wilson, Callaghan and Thatcher).
QuoteI guess this is some sort of strategy to keep the HoL voting your way by appointing new ones.  Lame.
That's exactly what it is.  Labour had been packing the Lords for the last decade, and so now Cameron, whose government is relatively precarious (although the idea of Miliband  as PM is revolting) feels the need to quickly redress the imbalance.

I do not hate you, nor do I love you, but you are made out of atoms which I can use for something else.

Josephus

#11
April 20, 2011, 08:22:24 AM
Is having a lot of peers the same as having a lot of facebook friends? :lmfao:
Civis Romanus Sum<br /><br />"My friends, love is better than anger. Hope is better than fear. Optimism is better than despair. So let us be loving, hopeful and optimistic. And we'll change the world." Jack Layton 1950-2011

Neil

#12
April 20, 2011, 08:23:45 AM
Quote from: Josephus on April 20, 2011, 08:22:24 AM
Is having a lot of peers the same as having a lot of facebook friends? :lmfao:
No.  :mellow:
I do not hate you, nor do I love you, but you are made out of atoms which I can use for something else.

Valmy

#13
April 20, 2011, 08:24:16 AM
Quote from: Neil on April 20, 2011, 08:20:26 AM
These days, they create life peers, which is the equivalent of a Senator with a lifetime term.  The last hereditary peer created was former PM Harold McMillan in the early 80s.  Since then, no PM has taken the traditional earldom, although some of them have become life peers (Wilson, Callaghan and Thatcher).

Ah ok that is good to know.  The old hereditary ones should be allowed to die out naturally (or not) without more being added.
Quote"This is a Russian warship. I propose you lay down arms and surrender to avoid bloodshed & unnecessary victims. Otherwise, you'll be bombed."

Zmiinyi defenders: "Russian warship, go fuck yourself."

Richard Hakluyt

#14
April 20, 2011, 08:29:16 AM
There are only 92 hereditaries left IIRC

The Lords' main power is to review government legislation and bounce it back if it is a load of shit, the maximum delay is a year IIRC and they cannot hold back revenue bills. Most active members of the Lords are former government ministers, many of whom have drafted poor laws back in the day. It is quite a useful chamber of government IMO.

Any reform to make it more representative of the voters' will would likely make it a stronger force. Hence governments like to bleat about reform but then never do anything about it.
Print
Go Up Pages1 2
User actions