Mr Ed's Grand Idea.......

[Slapshot]

While I don't disagree...I think there are rather more important things that Millibland should be looking at.....

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

[mikey4444]

Zacs...I always try to be use facts and logic in my posts !

My contention that the Tories would never have attempted to reform the Lords is surely difficult to argue against. But like the minimum wage, the Tories have conveniently changed their mind about Lords reform, although they have shown no indication that they wish to go further, and now Labour have. So we have real choice next May.

[Quizmonster]

There are 92 hereditary peers and - together with the 26 C of E bishops - that's 118 people, none of whom should have anything whatsoever to do with UK legislation.

[Farriercm]

As Sir Oracle said get rid of the lords completely, I will second that.
P/s and thats the last time I will call you Sir,

[mikey4444]

QM...before May 1997, 100% of the Lords had everything to do with legislation, without being remotely qualified to do so. At least that number is now severely reduced, all down to Labours win.

To paraphrase the "Life of Brian".....what have Labour ever done for us !

Well, reform of the Lords and the minimum wage are 2 to start with !

[Gromit]

DTCWord fan,
During Labour's 13 years in power, they let in 169,000 net migrants per year.

Guess what the Coalitions average is?

Clue: It is higher.

[mikey4444]

Gromit...don't confuse the right wing on here with any facts !

[Peter Pedant]

Sir O: // I do not see the relevance of having non elected peers making decisions for us. //

because they behave more independently than the sheep on the Commons who vote as their whips tell them

unfortunately of the 1 000 or so peers - mostly appointed for life
Like Lord Darsi or Lord Walid, they get to the Lords ( £500 /d no questions asked ) and then dont even turn up !

[Gromit]

It is not a very sexy policy and I doubt it will have people clammering to vote Labour. But it is important and a good policy to have.

[Peter Pedant]

Quite right Gromm
reform of the legislature has never been a vote winner
and I dont think anyone thinks the House of Lords now works better ( or indeed any different ) to what it was like before 1997

[Gromit]

PP
Do you really believe the hereditary Peers are Independent?

Their ancestor (or themselves) would have originally been appointed on a political basis. The notion that they suddenly become non partisan because they have inherited a title a little strange.

[mikey4444]

PP...so you think that a second House, with 100% unelected or unappointed persons is better than we have today I take it ?

All those ancient Rolls Royces and Daimlers, with their even more ancient occupants, that the Tories used to herd into the Lords car park, every time they were frightened of losing an important vote....you think that was better and more democratic ?

[bazwillrun]

"what have Labour ever done for us ! "

what, you mean apart from always leaving the country in ruins and massively in debt because of their one and only fiscal policy, ie: spend spend spend and then spend even more whenever they get elected, and from allowing and actively encouraging mass immigration at every possible opportunity....yeah apart from that what have they done for us !?.....and youve got the audacity and barefaced cheek to call UKIP looney-tunes !

you should give up spending your life on here and go into stand up comedy

[Quizmonster]

Mikey, I'm perfectly well aware of what the position re the numbers in the House of Lords was prior to 1997. My point above was to express my view that there should not be ANY such people legislating the lives of the UK electorate, never mind 118 of them.
As a Scot, I particularly resent the bishops, since the C of E is the Established Church only in England! In fact, as I've said many times here on AB and given that they DO vote on matters affecting Scots, I think they are little different from the Scottish MPs whom the English resent for voting on laws affecting the English!

[ToraToraTora]

clutching at straws a bit Ed but amything that gets less snouts in the trough is good.

[Svejk]

they just said that Labour voted against the same policy when the coalition put it forward 2 years ago. There's interesting.

[SirOracle]

svejk Don't understand your post......please could you clarify it for me.

[Svejk]

not really. It seems self evident to me. Labour joined 90 Conservative rebels and voted against Lords reform 2 years ago.

[naomi24]

Gromit, //During Labour's 13 years in power, they let in 169,000 net migrants per year.

Guess what the Coalitions average is?

Clue: It is higher. //

That's disingenuous. When Labour were in office, the floodgates from eastern Europe weren't open.

Mikey, ....//minimum wage are 2 to start with ! //

Yes, and they abolished the 10p tax rate for low earners - giving with one hand and taking away with the other - and they rifled the working man's pension pot - but, to paraphrase you, let's not confuse the left wing on here with any facts!

[DTCwordfan]

Just about what I was going to say, naomi, about the floodgates opening, a degree of satire to what I wrote earlier - anyway, what is the Great Ed doing about the Scottish Labour Party - not much it seems and it looks like that the SNP will be demolishing them up there - which then leads onto the SNP and not UKIP perhaps holding the balance of power in a hung government.....

Well done Ed, SNP get what they want through the back door and the Conservatives secure England and Wales. What a plonker, even Foot and Kinnock added together couldn't have served up such a spectacular own goal, so let's go back to counting Lords and Bishops shall we?