Lords stand up for the public - again!

[Xaccers]

Those pesky Lords, you know the ones, Bliar isn't very fond of them, supposedly out of touch and a hinderence to democracy and all that, well, they've gone and done it again.

The exemption of MP's from the Freedom of Information act won't go any further because not one Lord gave it support.

Oh dear, we obviously should get rid of them all.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/6750447.stm

Best quote:

Liberal Democrat leader in the Lords, Tom McNally, who opposed the bill, said: "It seems very likely that this squalid little bill will no longer become law. We are happy that this bill will not become law.
It speaks volumes that no member of the House of Lords was prepared to support this legislation."

It's a worry when an unelected house does a better job of controlling legislation than the commons do!

Thumbs up from all the adults in THIS household..Well done the House of Lords.

[Shaun]

They did well in this instance - I'm surprised it got as far as it did but as my Nan says, "One swallow doesn't make a summer".

[Paul K]

Originally Posted by Shaun

They did well in this instance - I'm surprised it got as far as it did but as my Nan says, "One swallow doesn't make a summer".

Depends on who is..... Let's hope that the motion continues to get blocked and that the MPs learn a lesson from this.

[lostandconfused]

isnt the whole purpose of the house of lords that they are not elected so they dont have to do things that will make themselves look popular to win votes, they can have the countries best interest at heart even if at the time it is unpopular. sounds like they are doing their job to me.

[BBKing]

Although in this case I don't know anyone other than a few MPs who thinks that exempting them and their affairs from full public disclosure is a good idea. Put the Lords up against the Commons in an election and I reckon the Lords would have it.

[Tezcatlipoca]

Good ol' Lords


They do seem to have a habit of squashing some rather bad legislation.

[Xaccers]

Originally Posted by Matt D

Good ol' Lords


They do seem to have a habit of squashing some rather bad legislation.

Well, it's kinda hard for them not to considering how much bad legislation has come their way in the past 10 years!

[TheDaddy]

Originally Posted by BBKing

Put the Lords up against the Commons in an election and I reckon the Lords would have it.

I'd put money on it!

[BBKing]

Which tells you something - we'd rather not have politicians who *want* to be politicians. Perhaps we should have a lottery to choose some of the Members, then an open competition to bribe them into supporting particular parties. After all, there's not a lot more corruption involved in openly being paid for your vote than in voting under the threat of the Whip, surely?

[I may not have entirely thought this one through]

[Stuart]

Isn't this exactly what the Lords are supposed to do? Not necessarily stand up for the public, but act as a counter balance to the House of Commons?

[Xaccers]

Originally Posted by Stuart C

Isn't this exactly what the Lords are supposed to do? Not necessarily stand up for the public, but act as a counter balance to the House of Commons?

Yup, and they are doing a damn fine job of it.
Which demonstrates how dodgy this government is in wanting to replace the current house of lords which works fine, with an elected one which runs the risk of lords doing what they think will get them re-elected (as happens in the commons) simply because the lords are a block for Labour to introduce it's badly thoughtout legislation.

[BBKing]

The Lords isn't perfect, though - it's too full of people who can't be bothered turning up, political placeservers given peerages as rewards, etc. This is, however, better than having a copy of the Commons there.

Something with long terms (15-20 years even), constituencies and that doesn't throw (all) the existing Lords onto the street might be good compromise. Throw in meagre expenses and peanut salaries to encourage people with real jobs to attend purely out of duty and we might be talking real improvement.

Originally Posted by BBKing

The Lords isn't perfect, though - it's too full of people who can't be bothered turning up, political placeservers given peerages as rewards, etc. This is, however, better than having a copy of the Commons there.

Something with long terms (15-20 years even), constituencies and that doesn't throw (all) the existing Lords onto the street might be good compromise. Throw in meagre expenses and peanut salaries to encourage people with real jobs to attend purely out of duty and we might be talking real improvement.

How about something like the House in America? Have 1/3rd of the Lords up for vote every 4/5 years?

[BBKing]

More or less what I was thinking of, but with longer terms (there are House elections every even year, aren't there?). The idea being that people on longer terms are more likely to think long-term about things, rather than worrying about doing something quickly with one eye on tomorrow's headline and next week's election.