House of Lords

[Smurf]

I'm torn over this. In my youth as a radical socialist I wanted it scrapped. I still loathe the hereditary principle and nobody should be in their because of that. However, as a revising chamber I think overall they do a good job. I watch quite a bit of their debates etc and they do amend quite a lot of government legislation for the better.

What's the alternatives? No revising chamber? Fully appointed chamber? Another elected chamber?

I would retain it as it is but modernise it to have fewer numbers and more equal representation but the criticism it gets in my opinion is mainly from folk who probably have no knowledge of how it works and operates.

 

[Shades]

I'm torn over this. In my youth as a radical socialist I wanted it scrapped. I still loathe the hereditary principle and nobody should be in their because of that. However, as a revising chamber I think overall they do a good job. I watch quite a bit of their debates etc and they do amend quite a lot of government legislation for the better.

What's the alternatives? No revising chamber? Fully appointed chamber? Another elected chamber?

I would retain it as it is but modernise it to have fewer numbers and more equal representation but the criticism it gets in my opinion is mainly from folk who probably have no knowledge of how it works and operates.

I think that the rUK should keep it all for themselves. The House of Lords seems to me to be just one more level of beaurocrasy that is expensive, un-democratic, nepotistic, based on increasingly irrelevant and historical priviledged and costs an absolute bomb. Is the country governed better because of its existence?

 

[egb_hibs]

It's existence is essential. Democracy is not remotely a perfect system and a second house in an essential check.

In my youth I would have thought similarly to a young smurf. I now feel the hereditary principle is uncomfortable in principle but quite effective in practice as a counter to careerist politicians.

However it's era is over, so how to fill the house is indeed tricky. Both in terms of what type of people go in and how they are selected it's difficult to come up with a fair solution.
It's all too easy to imagine it ending up like the universities and the BBC full of the illiberal elite who've not really got that much time for what the people want.

 

[1 Mcnamara]

I'm torn over this. In my youth as a radical socialist I wanted it scrapped. I still loathe the hereditary principle and nobody should be in their because of that. However, as a revising chamber I think overall they do a good job. I watch quite a bit of their debates etc and they do amend quite a lot of government legislation for the better.

What's the alternatives? No revising chamber? Fully appointed chamber? Another elected chamber?

I would retain it as it is but modernise it to have fewer numbers and more equal representation but the criticism it gets in my opinion is mainly from folk who probably have no knowledge of how it works and operates.

For someone who has had the" pity smurf everyone is picking on him" card played for them, and to which you have alluded too, you don't half like a wee troll.

 

[Jack]

I think the hereditary bit has to go and there should be an age/senility clause, that Scottish peer not being fit to stand trial recently but playing a full role in the Lords was ridiculous.

I'd like to see [more] independent people in there, although how political parties could be trusted to ensure that I don't know.

The term of office these folk get could maybe be variable, depending on the basis of how they got there, but in normal circumstances longer than a term in the Commons.

 

[gun ainm]

that a second chamber is a useful brake on the HoC is not a reason to retain the Lords, the second biggest unelected governing chamber after the Chinese People's congress - it should be scrapped forthwith, it is beyond reform. Replace it with an elected senate or make the house of commons a constitutional chamber that covers the federal republic's 4 or 5 member governments. how anyone can argue for its retention (without it directly benefiting their own circumstance) is beyond me - off wi' their heads

(must say i was tickled by the idea of a young smurf as a radical socialist)

 

[egb_hibs]

[MENTION=325]gun ainm[/MENTION] - why so surprised at smurf? He's not even moved all that far from socialism really, in fact on some aspects he's the most consistent among you left of centre fellas

Ps what does the lords do so badly? I think the separation between the idea and the reality is interesting and important here, especially given the challenges in coming up with a new method for populating a second chamber

 

[emerald green]

[MENTION=325]gun ainm[/MENTION] - why so surprised at smurf? He's not even moved all that far from socialism really, in fact on some aspects he's the most consistent among you left of centre fellas

Ps what does the lords do so badly? I think the separation between the idea and the reality is interesting and important here, especially given the challenges in coming up with a new method for populating a second chamber

Why have you decided all of a sudden to be Smurfs sponsor?

WTF....really.

After 30,000 odd posts, you thing he cannae stand up for himself? :115:

 

[Smurf]

I think that the rUK should keep it all for themselves. The House of Lords seems to me to be just one more level of beaurocrasy that is expensive, un-democratic, nepotistic, based on increasingly irrelevant and historical priviledged and costs an absolute bomb. Is the country governed better because of its existence?

"The rUK should keep it to themselves"

Could we keep the Referendum/Independence debate out of this please?

- - - Updated - - -

For someone who has had the" pity smurf everyone is picking on him" card played for them, and to which you have alluded too, you don't half like a wee troll.

How the fuck is it a troll?

- - - Updated - - -

It's existence is essential. Democracy is not remotely a perfect system and a second house in an essential check.

In my youth I would have thought similarly to a young smurf. I now feel the hereditary principle is uncomfortable in principle but quite effective in practice as a counter to careerist politicians.

However it's era is over, so how to fill the house is indeed tricky. Both in terms of what type of people go in and how they are selected it's difficult to come up with a fair solution.
It's all too easy to imagine it ending up like the universities and the BBC full of the illiberal elite who've not really got that much time for what the people want.

Agreed. I also quite like that the house of lords appears to be predominantly filled with older experienced folk who are in the main free from party politics.

 

[gun ainm]

[MENTION=325]gun ainm[/MENTION] - why so surprised at smurf? He's not even moved all that far from socialism really, in fact on some aspects he's the most consistent among you left of centre fellas

Ps what does the lords do so badly? I think the separation between the idea and the reality is interesting and important here, especially given the challenges in coming up with a new method for populating a second chamber

I'm going to avoid the smurf question as I dont want to derail the thread

the House of Lords has been ineffective at moderating the off the wall policies/legislation of successive governments - from the iraq war to the bedroom tax.

Can I ask you what they do right? for sake of brevity?

 

[Smurf]

I'm going to avoid the smurf question as I dont want to derail the thread

the House of Lords has been ineffective at moderating the off the wall policies/legislation of successive governments - from the iraq war to the bedroom tax.

Can I ask you what they do right? for sake of brevity?

Surely though it would be an affront to democracy if the Lord's did change the will of the Common's? Like it or not the Common's voted through Iraq and the Bedroom Tax so it was therefore right they happened...

 

[1 Mcnamara]

"The rUK should keep it to themselves"

Could we keep the Referendum/Independence debate out of this please?

- - - Updated - - -



How the $#@! is it a troll?

- - - Updated - - -



Agreed. I also quite like that the house of lords appears to be predominantly filled with older experienced folk who are in the main free from party politics.

"Do you think the part of our democracy in which the elite get paid for sleeping and has no SNP representation is a great tradition which should get to run forevermore ?" Is a fairly decent troll IMO. It's likely response on here is predictable I would have thought.

 

[Smurf]

"Do you think the part of our democracy in which the elite get paid for sleeping and has no SNP representation is a great tradition which should get to run forevermore ?" Is a fairly decent troll IMO. It's likely response on here is predictable I would have thought.

Another ridiculous myth that they are all in there sleeping.

 

[egb_hibs]

I'm going to avoid the smurf question as I dont want to derail the thread

the House of Lords has been ineffective at moderating the off the wall policies/legislation of successive governments - from the iraq war to the bedroom tax.

Can I ask you what they do right? for sake of brevity?

theres a list of their interventions here;

http://www.ucl.ac.uk/constitution-unit/research/parliament/house-of-lords/lords-defeats

Their powers are quite limited, but they're useful for the likes of amending labours thought crimes legislation (racial and religious hatred act). They don't have the power to stop the government declaring war; nor for that matter does the commons!

- - - Updated - - -

Why have you decided all of a sudden to be Smurfs sponsor?

WTF....really.

After 30,000 odd posts, you thing he cannae stand up for himself? :115:

i'm not normally on the PC side of an argument as I am with independence. Being aligned with the attendant intolerance, shouting down and irrationalism is even less pleasant than being on the opposing side from it.

I'm not defending smurf because he needs his hand held, but because the braying tide of bullŷing nationalism needs challenged by nationalists more than by anyone. This remains true despite smurfs cheerleading for a quasi fascistic labour leadership which legitimised this kind of demonising politics. At the same time, I do hope this is causing smurf to reflect on that. :coffee:

 

[Westside Green]

Surely though it would be an affront to democracy if the Lord's did change the will of the Common's? Like it or not the Common's voted through Iraq and the Bedroom Tax so it was therefore right they happened...

Quite a few things got voted through that had no right to happen in a so called civilised country.

 

[1 Mcnamara]

Another ridiculous myth that they are all in there sleeping.

My eyes must deceive me.
I didn't say all of them, but a few of them sleeping is a common sight . If it wasn't so serious it would be funny.

How is the flat earth society these days?

 

[southfieldhibby]

Make it like jury duty, 5 year term, no opt out and your job has to kept open for you. One time deal, with the same process used for selecting jurors.

Get the hereditary lot out.

Bicameral government is essential and Scotland should consider it

 

[emerald green]

i'm not normally on the PC side of an argument as I am with independence. Being aligned with the attendant intolerance, shouting down and irrationalism is even less pleasant than being on the opposing side from it.

I'm not defending smurf because he needs his hand held, but because the braying tide of bullŷing nationalism needs challenged by nationalists more than by anyone. This remains true despite smurfs cheerleading for a quasi fascistic labour leadership which legitimised this kind of demonising politics. At the same time, I do hope this is causing smurf to reflect on that. :coffee:

Ye need to quantify this eeg, because I find that staggering! On the bounce? I would suggest a (very) high % of posts are reactive to the blue fellys posts. (which I think is his point).

I'm an independant, rather than a Nationalist. I hope you are too.

 

[egb_hibs]

Ye need to quantify this eeg, because I find that staggering! On the bounce? I would suggest a (very) high % of posts are reactive to the blue fellys posts. (which I think is his point).

Well he used to get the virtual gang shoeing time after time during indy debates. His posts are responded to studs up, with aggression, and with seeming wilful efforts to misunderstand what he's saying. Proclaimer and Henry get similar - Henry's posts are normally distinguished by conceding points, acknowledging others points and being candid about where things are - necessarily - guesstimates,. And yet he's met with the kind of anti debating that the internet specialises in, crowing meaninglessly when a bunch of links can't be provided, because by the nature of the subject things must for now rest on our judgement. it's not as bad on the bounce as elsewhere but the same mob mindset is in evidence albeit with a degree (or several) more civility and intelligence.

I'm an independant, rather than a Nationalist. I hope you are too.

I'm not sure what hair splitting is intended to suggest?

 

[Smurf]

I would suggest a (very) high % of posts are reactive to the blue fellys posts. (which I think is his point).

If you want to think that a very high percentage of pro independence threads and posts on here are reactive to me then you are existing in a parallel universe.

You'd be quite happy for there to be no dissenting voices with these threads to the pro independence viewpoint that is as we all know the overwhelming majority on here.

I find the almost indignation at the audacity to have a different viewpoint on this topic to the majority quite funny really.

 

[egb_hibs]

I find the almost indignation at the audacity to have a different viewpoint on this topic to the majority quite funny really.

You should try taking issue with something the liberal elite have really put beyond the pale such as abortion or gay marriage. The most rabid nat hostility is cotton wool stuff compared to the climate engendered by your party in power and now, sadly, an established norm.

 

[emerald green]

Well he used to get the virtual gang shoeing time after time during indy debates. His posts are responded to studs up, with aggression, and with seeming wilful efforts to misunderstand what he's saying. Proclaimer and Henry get similar - Henry's posts are normally distinguished by conceding points, acknowledging others points and being candid about where things are - necessarily - guesstimates,. And yet he's met with the kind of anti debating that the internet specialises in, crowing meaninglessly when a bunch of links can't be provided, because by the nature of the subject things must for now rest on our judgement. it's not as bad on the bounce as elsewhere but the same mob mindset is in evidence albeit with a degree (or several) more civility and intelligence.

I'm not sure what hair splitting is intended to suggest?

I'm not sure thats quantifying anything. I think you should concede the fact that the blue felly gets at least what he dishes out. Almost everything posted is like a statement of fact rather than opinion (not really debating if you like). Also, I think the Proclaimer is nae shrinking violet, and I have not seen one thread where he hasn't (more than) held his own. Yes in the main regarding Henry (though his posts are massively swayed by where her lives), but again, in anything I've read he counters everything put against him, generally with aplomb.

...but again, your no' their sponsor, and perhaps the rampart nationalistic bullying you refer to is from maybe other boards you frequent.

The "hairsplitting" is because they are poles apart. I could, with almost 100% certainty, aver that the "Nationalists" on the bounce would be closer labelled as Independants. We all know where nationalism leads! Again, I could almost guarantee that 100% just feel that they wish Scotland to be run by Scots in the National Parliament in Edinburgh... geting our fucking house in order if you like.

So when, lets lazily call them unionists seem to get themselves in a fankle, they, more likely than not, are arguing with people who have the exact same agenda!!

etc etc

- - - Updated - - -

If you want to think that a very high percentage of pro independence threads and posts on here are reactive to me then you are existing in a parallel universe.

You'd be quite happy for there to be no dissenting voices with these threads to the pro independence viewpoint that is as we all know the overwhelming majority on here.

I find the almost indignation at the audacity to have a different viewpoint on this topic to the majority quite funny really.

Im sorry mate, but Im just no' buying that yer hard done for on this board.

I'd be happy if there was no dissenting voices???? WTF are you on about? "Dissent" all you want radgeworks, just stop feeling sorry for yersell when (often) more than one fellow Bouncer disagrees with you!

Its also is kinda pathetic that ye've got a sponsor - man up and tell him yer a big ugly funker who can handle himsel in a thread!

Keep it real!! We all need to remind ourselves that we're fucking Hibs!

:raisehat:

Your last sentence : look in the mirror mate, your complaining about exactly what you do!

- - - Updated - - -

You should try taking issue with something the liberal elite have really put beyond the pale such as abortion or gay marriage. The most rabid nat hostility is cotton wool stuff compared to the climate engendered by your party in power and now, sadly, an established norm.

Hows that likes?

Whats your stance on gay marriage ? Whats your stance on abortion? What the funk has that got to do with Smurfs affliation to nulab?... and why is it sadly now an established norm....move wi the times!

Solipsism?

 

[Smurf]

Im sorry mate, but Im just no' buying that yer hard done for on this board.

I'd be happy if there was no dissenting voices???? WTF are you on about? "Dissent" all you want radgeworks, just stop feeling sorry for yersell when (often) more than one fellow Bouncer disagrees with you!

Its also is kinda pathetic that ye've got a sponsor - man up and tell him yer a big ugly funker who can handle himsel in a thread!

Keep it real!! We all need to remind ourselves that we're $#@!ing Hibs!

:raisehat:

Your last sentence : look in the mirror mate, your complaining about exactly what you do!

You are totally unreal...

You've now somehow managed to convince yourself I'm feeling sorry for myself and feeling bullied.

It's laughable.

I'm one of the lone voices on the No so called unionist side yet you are the one who objects to me voicing such opinions.

I think it's you that needs to man up. Fuck sake you are even getting your knickers in a twist cause egb has posted a few comments....

Respect difference of opinion. I do. You don't. That's the difference.

 

[emerald green]

You are totally unreal...

You've now somehow managed to convince yourself I'm feeling sorry for myself and feeling bullied.

It's laughable.

I'm one of the lone voices on the No so called unionist side yet you are the one who objects to me voicing such opinions.

I think it's you that needs to man up. Fuck sake you are even getting your knickers in a twist cause egb has posted a few comments....

Respect difference of opinion. I do. You don't. That's the difference.

Ive not convinced myself of anything in respect of you, but aye, it looks like yer obsessed with Yes voters . (mind just a couple of days ago where someone started a thread with absolutely nothing at all to do with SNP etc, and your first post brought it to round to that, and what followed was everybody trying to tell you your coming across as obsessed?)


I have NEVER objected to you voicing your opinions. Get that into your head. NEVER.

I would always defend your as anyones else' right to say whatever you want!

In respect of EGB, thats really down to his bombastic posting style and how he seems to view himself as the headteacher of the boonce cooshed. Nowt to dae with getting my knickers in a twist, I am as chilled as one can be. (The fact that he is fighting your battles is neither here nor there).

Again in response to your respecting opinions, have a wee look at yersel. Your last sentence is utter drivel.

Anyway, as is the norm when dealing with yourself, I will be the bigger man, and wish you a very chilled and happy holiday. Hope you and your family have a great time. Really (from you query on hotel and parking)

 

[1 Mcnamara]

You are totally unreal...

You've now somehow managed to convince yourself I'm feeling sorry for myself and feeling bullied.

It's laughable.

I'm one of the lone voices on the No so called unionist side yet you are the one who objects to me voicing such opinions.

I think it's you that needs to man up. $#@! sake you are even getting your knickers in a twist cause egb has posted a few comments....

Respect difference of opinion. I do. You don't. That's the difference.

TBF emerald green , and others have , in a round about way been accused of bullying you and another couple of Westminster diehards . It's all ( what I have seen) just healthy debate , over a very emotive subject. If you didn't enjoy clashing with people in the verbal sense, I'm sure you would just keep your opinions to yourself. Of course I don't know you, but you don't strike me as a person who requires forum minders.

 

[egb_hibs]

[MENTION=4819]emerald green[/MENTION] - I amused to read you consider my attitude as that of a head teacher; given that you meticulously mark everyone's work :glassraise:

 

[Desperate Dan]

All aboard, 45 more for the gravy train special, 26 of them cameron's cronies. While folk struggle tae live the cost of this affront tae democracy continues tae increase.

Cameron announces 26 new Tory peers in dissolution honours - BBC News

Full list of new peers and other honours - BBC News

 

[Doc Shrink]

Many arguments can be put up - for or against having the second House.



Clincher: