Brexit.

Sid

Mmmmm.
VVO Supporter 🍦🎈👾❤
Joined
Sep 20, 2018
Messages
2,208
Location
NL
SL Rez
2007
Joined SLU
2009
Will he shout "Shut up, FFS!" or "Odder" just like Bercow?
That's the question.
 
  • 1Like
Reactions: Govi

Arkady Arkright

Active member
Joined
Oct 12, 2018
Messages
120
To my mind lords should not be lords for life, their numbers should be limited and membership should not be at the whim of a sitting government. Bishops should not be considered to be lords and the last of the hereditary peers with the right to vote should lose that right.
I agree absolutely 👏
 

Innula Zenovka

Nasty Brit
VVO Supporter 🍦🎈👾❤
Joined
Sep 20, 2018
Messages
3,138
SLU Posts
18459
I agree largely with everything you say there.

The deadlock you forsee is I think an inevitable result of our FPTP system which resolves down to a two party system. In a fairer electoral system, a PR based system where parties were more varied and more evenly represented it should not be an issue as it would be rare for a single party to command an overall majority in either house.

But I do like the idea of replacing the lords with a "people's assembly" drawn along similar lines to jury duty with something like an MPs standard salary (maybe even tax free). a £70,000 chunk of cash would make a lot more people willing to take part. You could exclude anyone who has had any kind of political career or been a significant donor to a political party. Such an assembly could be required to mirror the population in certain key areas (ages/educational background/gender/minorities etc.) to make it mirror as closely as possible the actual make up of people in the country. As opposed to the house of commons which is skewed in a very different direction to the population. You could structure it differently avoid political party affiliations within the assembly, structure it to make the commons present not just a bill for a vote but a justification for it and the opposition could present their reasons for opposing. Try to make it focus on what is being legislated and not on party loyalties.
A "people's assembly" is an excellent idea, but the job of the House of Lords is to act as a second chamber, to scrutinise and amend the detail of particular bills.

A people's assembly would be no sort of substitute for a second, revisory legislative chamber, and I don't see why we should need to choose between the two.
 

Innula Zenovka

Nasty Brit
VVO Supporter 🍦🎈👾❤
Joined
Sep 20, 2018
Messages
3,138
SLU Posts
18459
ok, why not?
I'm not sure if you're thinking of people's assemblies or citizens' assemblies or something different again, but those are deliberative bodies who try to come up with a consensual set of proposals to deal with particular political concerns.

That's the first stage in the process, though.

The proposals then have to be taken up by government and put into legislation, and the House of Lords provide a forum for scrutiny, debate, and amendment of the details of the legislation.

A citizen's or people's assembly has one kind of job to do, and the second chamber of a parliamentary legislature has another, completely different, job.
 

Chin Rey

Lag fighter
Joined
Oct 28, 2018
Messages
426
Location
Norway
SL Rez
2013
I want a genuinely independent second chamber, which immediately causes problems if it's to be an elected chamber, since having one would seem to involve creating a system for choosing its members that isn't dominated by the existing political parties.

Otherwise, it seems to me, you end up with a system whereby the main political parties are going to dominate the elections for the second chamber and it'll end up dominated primarily by loyal members of the main political parties, since they're the people with the resources and the organisation to promote their candidates, and they will naturally tend to select candidates who can be trusted, by and large, to remain loyal to their party.
That's exactly how it is in the USA of course. ;)

But why do you want a bicameral parliament at all? There are fewer and fewer of them in the world and it's not as if they tend to be more democratic or have better checks and balances than the nations with unicameral parliaments.
 

Innula Zenovka

Nasty Brit
VVO Supporter 🍦🎈👾❤
Joined
Sep 20, 2018
Messages
3,138
SLU Posts
18459
That's exactly how it is in the USA of course. ;)

But why do you want a bicameral parliament at all? There are fewer and fewer of them in the world and it's not as if they tend to be more democratic or have better checks and balances than the nations with unicameral parliaments.
It's not what I want, it's what the UK currently has.

Changing the way the membership of the House of Lords is selected is one thing.

Completely revising the whole British democratic system is an enterprise of a completely different magnitude and one for which there's no particular appetite or popular demand, quite apart from the fear -- fully understandable in the UK, and particularly at the moment -- of what a single chamber might do without the moderating influence of the second chamber.
 

Tigger

not on speaking terms with the voices in my head
Joined
Sep 24, 2018
Messages
849
I'm not sure if you're thinking of people's assemblies or citizens' assemblies or something different again, but those are deliberative bodies who try to come up with a consensual set of proposals to deal with particular political concerns.

That's the first stage in the process, though.

The proposals then have to be taken up by government and put into legislation, and the House of Lords provide a forum for scrutiny, debate, and amendment of the details of the legislation.

A citizen's or people's assembly has one kind of job to do, and the second chamber of a parliamentary legislature has another, completely different, job.
OK Fine if a citizens assembly has a single rigid meaning in your world I'll call it something else, instead of a citizens assembly, I'll call it.... a 2nd house made up of ordinary people.

I do not want party politicians to be part of a 2nd house, I want it to be people. I want a government to be forced to explain the intent of its legislation to a group of people, explain why it's a good idea, how the legislation they've written manages to implement the idea and then let those opposed do the opposite, explain why it's something we shouldn't do or point out the ways in which the written legislation fails to meet that goal or can create bias. And then let people have the final say on whether or not it's done.

I really don't like the make up of the house of commons. It skews too heavily into rich families from particular schools and from political dynasties: Churchill's grandson, the various rt hon. Johnson Siblings, Rees-Mogg MP son of Rees-Mogg MP of the house of Rees-Mogg.

I want a 2nd chamber that, by design, can never be dominated by wealth, class or ancestry.
 
  • 1Thanks
Reactions: Innula Zenovka

Luisa Land

Well-known member
Joined
Sep 21, 2018
Messages
177
Location
EU.. Germany
the madness of Brexit is reflected in many details

In the UK "The market share of the Big Four supermarkets has tumbled to a 15-year low as the march of the German discounters Aldi and Lidl (in the UK) continues.



the german Spiegel writes
Customer uncertainty is bad for business, and that applies to most sectors of the economy. Discounters are an exception: If citizens hold their money together, there are opportunities for this segment of food retailing.

This can be seen in the example of Great Britain. There, the Brexit turbulence is causing problems for many retailers because the economic situation is worse and many customers have become cautious. Four out of five Britons are worried that food and drink prices will continue to rise after Brexit. According to the Kantar research institute, there is "little doubt among retailers, manufacturers and farmers that Brexit will lead to a significant disruption in the UK's food supply".

Not a good outlook, actually - but that's exactly what two German companies are playing into their hands: the discounters Aldi and Lidl.

In contrast to the competition, their business is growing strongly.

Translated with www.DeepL.com/Translator




this development must drive Brexiters crazy
 
Last edited:
  • 1Thanks
Reactions: Brenda Archer

Innula Zenovka

Nasty Brit
VVO Supporter 🍦🎈👾❤
Joined
Sep 20, 2018
Messages
3,138
SLU Posts
18459
I want a 2nd chamber that, by design, can never be dominated by wealth, class or ancestry.
How will your design prevent that chambers' being dominated by people from backgrounds shared by those of the majority of British residents, and thus primarily comprising British citizens resident in England who are primarily white, and primarily people born in the UK rather than overseas?

Also, how long do people serve as members of this second chamber, and what if they don't want to?

ETA: I'm not necessarily attacking the idea, but I am rather concerned about the practicability of designing an assembly that meets your requirements, which I fear may be impossible.
 
Last edited:

Tigger

not on speaking terms with the voices in my head
Joined
Sep 24, 2018
Messages
849
How will your design prevent that chambers' being dominated by people from backgrounds shared by those of the majority of British residents, and thus primarily comprising British citizens resident in England who are primarily white, and primarily people born in the UK rather than overseas?

Also, how long do people serve as members of this second chamber, and what if they don't want to?

ETA: I'm not necessarily attacking the idea, but I am rather concerned about the practicability of designing an assembly that meets your requirements, which I fear may be impossible.
I think a term of one year would be appropriate, ideally accompanied by a decent, MP salary scale payment. A free to enter lottery that grants you the chance of membership of the house for 1 year and 100k tax free should get plenty of applicants and that way at least you know all the applicants are willing. Other option is to approach it in the same manner as jury duty, it shouldn't be forced it should be easy to opt out either permanently or because of temporary issues that make service at a given time difficult. I would expect that giving people an opportunity to very directly participate in the governance of the country combined with a generous payment should keep interest high.

My initial thoughts are that the make up of the new house should reflect the make up of the country in as many metrics as possible, but that could be argued as unfair and maybe we would do better to try to boost participation from minorities and groups subject to discrimination. Plenty to argue about just in that area. I would look to exclude people who have had a political career or who have been substantial donors to political parties, in other words, excluding the people who are currently most likely to be lords.
 

Bartholomew Gallacher

Well-known member
Joined
Sep 26, 2018
Messages
1,512
SL Rez
2002
The curtain has been lifted: former speaker of the House of Commons John Bercow is a remainer. He had a speech at the Foreign Press Association in London.

“I don’t think it helps the UK. Brexit is the biggest mistake of this country after the war. I respect [the] prime minister, [Boris] Johnson, but Brexit doesn’t help us. It’s better to be part of the [EU] power bloc,” Bercow said, according to the journalist Antonello Guerrera, of La Repubblica, who attended the event in London.

God, I am going to miss his ties...

 
  • 1Agree
  • 1Thanks
Reactions: Govi and Brenda Archer

danielravennest

Active member
Joined
Sep 21, 2018
Messages
1,100
SLU Posts
9073
Also, how long do people serve as members of this second chamber, and what if they don't want to?
In the US, a grand jury is made up of ordinary citizens, who serve for a limited term, investigating if there is enough evidence to indict someone for a crime. People can be excused from jury duty for a good cause. For example, when I was taking care of my mom, and couldn't leave her alone, a doctor's note got me excused. Parents with children at home were regularly excused.

The same scheme could be used for legislation. A group of citizens could be empaneled to investigate a proposed new law. They can call witnesses, like grand juries do, investigate on their own, etc. If they decide the law is no good, they can send it back to the House for revision. Once that law is disposed of, they can go home.