Ed's stretched too far??

[geared 306]

He's made some pretty magnificent promises but I think this is far and away the biggest thing he's said yet.

 

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-29857849

 

Labour would replace the House of Lords with an elected senate if the party won next May's general election, party leader Ed Miliband is to say.

 

He will tell a conference in Blackpool on Saturday the current system "fails to represent large parts of the UK".

 

Senators would be elected from Scotland, Wales, Northern Ireland and the English regions instead of from constituencies like MPs.

 

This will give the senate a "clearly defined different role", Labour says

 

If he sticks to his word I'd probably vote for him to be fair

[andyofborg 11]

That's all well and good, but what powers will this place have?

 

Will it be able to block legislation?

 

The current House of Lords understands that it's not elected and nearly always, eventually backs down in the face of a determined Commons and if all else fails there is the Parliament Act.

 

All this falls apart when they turn round and say, "hold on, we're just as elected as you are why should our concerns be ignored"

 

The annoying thing is that, in general, the current House of Lords more or less works.

[tzijlstra 11]

Funny isn't it, how key LibDem policies keep finding their way into Labour and Tory policy. Got a great message from friend Dave on Facebook saying: "We have cut income tax for the poorest!" No mention of the fact that he would never have committed to that if he hadn't been in a coalition with LibDems.

[geared 306]

That's all well and good, but what powers will this place have?

 

Will it be able to block legislation?

 

Surely it'll just be like any other senate, as plenty of countries have them and they don't seem to have too many problems.

[Happ Hazzard 10]

How would an elected House of Lords be any more popular than the current elected House of Commons? It'd just be the same old cronies. Peter Mandelson etc.

[andyofborg 11]

Surely it'll just be like any other senate, as plenty of countries have them and they don't seem to have too many problems.

 

will it though?

 

at the minute the house of lords cannot block legislation only delay it. that's acceptable since it's an unelected body.

 

the proposed senate may be similarly limited but if that's the case then sooner or later the "we're just as elected as you" argument will happen.

 

On the other hand, if it can permanantly block legislation then at some point it's going to run into a big fight with the commons over something or other.

 

the mechanics of how our government functions might be wierd and non-particularly functional and to change one bit of it without looking at changing the other bits is a recipe for disaster.

 

---------- Post added 01-11-2014 at 13:13 ----------

 

How would an elected House of Lords be any more popular than the current elected House of Commons? It'd just be the same old cronies. Peter Mandelson etc.

 

they will be elected cronies far better than "appointed by people we elect" cronies

[erebus 10]

You could elect a cabinet of cockroaches and the policies would always be the same....Why? Because all policies, including foreign are generated via their masters the City of London>

 

Democracy is a joke, where the unwashed manage to put a cross XXXXX , a mark on paper and say goodby to all responsibilities as to their taxes and laws for another 5 years.

 

That is political involvement?????????

[lines 10]

Another knee jerk idea from Ed trying to be populous.

 

How much would it really cost to set up? Can we afford it now? Its a non runner anytime soon!

[andyofborg 11]

Another knee jerk idea from Ed trying to be populous.

 

How much would it really cost to set up? Can we afford it now? Its a non runner anytime soon!

 

doubt it would cost that much more than the house of lords currently costs

 

a better thing for him to call for is a constitutional convention where relationship and powers of the Commons, House of Lords and local councils can be explored and refined, though i expect that's too hard a thing for the dailymail readers to grasp.

[tinfoilhat 11]

He's made some pretty magnificent promises but I think this is far and away the biggest thing he's said yet.

 

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-29857849

 

 

 

If he sticks to his word I'd probably vote for him to be fair

 

Thing is, it assumes that house the House of Commons represents the majority of this country which it fails to do on a spectacular level.

[ANGELFIRE1 10]

Doubtful if the Milly bore will be in charge when election day comes round.

 

House of Lords, what a great job - sign your name then bugger off to do what you want, and pick up your 300 quid "expenses" on the way, or wait until Friday, then 5 x 300 = 1500 sovs for 5 days name signing.

 

Angel1

[lines 10]

doubt it would cost that much more than the house of lords currently costs

 

a better thing for him to call for is a constitutional convention where relationship and powers of the Commons, House of Lords and local councils can be explored and refined, though i expect that's too hard a thing for the dailymail readers to grasp.

 

Not how much to run, but set up! Can you grasp the difference there?

 

 

Also if it were an elected senate then the cost of elections would be additional!

 

---------- Post added 01-11-2014 at 19:43 ----------

 

The 2010 general election cost £80 million and that doesn't include the campaigning (a time when politicians aren't getting on with their constitutional duties.)

 

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/election_2010/8497014.stm#cost