Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 23, 2023 10:14:16 GMT
Not it didn't but the fact that it will take years even as much as a decade to disband the HOL and find a replacement system with the electoral nightmare that will ensue seems to have been missed by you. Your idea seems to be - 1st day disband the HOLs, 2nd day hold elections for a second chamber, 3rd day get them to work.😂 Whilst the process is happening Starmer will appoint Labour Lords to counter balance the Tory party stuffing the house with Tories. So much to standing up to the Labour party when they lie then Red. That didn't last long. I do not believe they have lied. They want to change the HOLs for an elected chamber, that takes time. They must reverse the Tory 'dominance' within the Lords to get legislation through until such time. |
|
|
|
Post by sheepy on Jun 23, 2023 10:15:41 GMT
So much to standing up to the Labour party when they lie then Red. That didn't last long. I do not believe they have lied. They want to change the HOLs for an elected chamber, that takes time. They must reverse the Tory 'dominance' within the Lords to get legislation through until such time. Wells theres a surprise, the Labour party are not liars but just twisters of the truth. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 23, 2023 10:33:42 GMT
I do not believe they have lied. They want to change the HOLs for an elected chamber, that takes time. They must reverse the Tory 'dominance' within the Lords to get legislation through until such time. Wells theres a surprise, the Labour party are not liars but just twisters of the truth. What's twisting? You are assuming. |
|
|
|
Post by sheepy on Jun 23, 2023 10:35:21 GMT
Wells theres a surprise, the Labour party are not liars but just twisters of the truth. What's twisting? You are assuming. Am I? or did I did listen to what they said in the first place. Which the goalposts are now moved and you are in full agreement which is extremely worrying for the future. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 23, 2023 10:54:15 GMT
What's twisting? You are assuming. Am I? or did I did listen to what they said in the first place. Which the goalposts are now moved and you are in full agreement which is extremely worrying for the future. You, obviously must be of the opinion that changing the system to an elected house could be done in a week or so.🤣 |
|
|
|
Post by Vinny on Jun 23, 2023 10:56:09 GMT
Abolish the Lords.
Lets have an elected body instead.
And use the Parliaments act if the Lords try to block their own dismissal.
|
|
|
|
Post by sheepy on Jun 23, 2023 10:57:45 GMT
Am I? or did I did listen to what they said in the first place. Which the goalposts are now moved and you are in full agreement which is extremely worrying for the future. You, obviously must be of the opinion that changing the system to an elected house could be done in a week or so.🤣 No I am obviously listening to excuses for backing moving the goalposts. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 23, 2023 13:18:23 GMT
You, obviously must be of the opinion that changing the system to an elected house could be done in a week or so.🤣 No I am obviously listening to excuses for backing moving the goalposts. No goalpost here. Tell you what, seeing how you are so knowledgeable tell me how you think abolishing the Lords should be done. Would you shut them down on the first day, week, month......? Or would you wait until an agreed replacement was in place? What about all the legislation that is going through the Lords, would you just abandon it? What about the new legislation, would you be happy for it to go through on the 'nod'? What about the costs, salaries, guidlines.......? I await your answer with bated breath. |
|
|
|
Post by Vinny on Jun 23, 2023 13:29:02 GMT
I would start by having the Electoral Commission draw up plans for mirrored boundaries for constituencies providing elected "Senators" for scrutiny each mapped to the existing boundaries for MPs.
Then, I would hold a referendum to see if the public actually want it.
Then, if the public say "Yes" set a date for an election.
The Lords would have their final session and hand over the House to elected Senators who would take over the job of Parliamentary scrutiny.
Existing Lords would, if they wished, be able to stand for election to the House of Senators.
Existing peerages would become an honorary title which in itself conveys no political power whatsoever.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 23, 2023 13:32:21 GMT
One key reason why Starmer has ammended or altered SOME commitments is because of the worsening economic outlook, it should be plainly obvious to most people, especially on commitments which involve borrowing.
Take for example The commitment on Green Energy Investment - a plan which envisaged investing £28 Billion per year on green energy.
This plan has had to be scaled back ( NOT abandoned ) because of a changed borrowing landscape, interest rates are rising, and UK Bond Yields are also rising, pushing up the cost of borrowing.
I bet a pound to a penny that if Starmer HAD NOT ammended spending commitments due to the fiscal climate, there would undoubtably have been cries of "the figures dont add up" ... or ... "Labours reckless spending plans".
|
|
|
|
Post by Fairsociety on Jun 23, 2023 14:02:18 GMT
One key reason why Starmer has ammended or altered SOME commitments is because of the worsening economic outlook, it should be plainly obvious to most people, especially on commitments which involve borrowing. Take for example The commitment on Green Energy Investment - a plan which envisaged investing £28 Billion per year on green energy. This plan has had to be scaled back ( NOT abandoned ) because of a changed borrowing landscape, interest rates are rising, and UK Bond Yields are also rising, pushing up the cost of borrowing. I bet a pound to a penny that if Starmer HAD NOT ammended spending commitments due to the fiscal climate, there would undoubtably have been cries of "the figures dont add up" ... or ... "Labours reckless spending plans". Starmer flip-flop doesn't know his arse from his elbow, he's all things to all people, he dips his toe in the water first, when he did his George Floyd kneel with his dippy sidekick Rayner and seen the backlash, that toe hasn't been back in the water again ... LOL |
|
|
|
Post by Baron von Lotsov on Jun 23, 2023 14:04:25 GMT
One key reason why Starmer has ammended or altered SOME commitments is because of the worsening economic outlook, it should be plainly obvious to most people, especially on commitments which involve borrowing. Take for example The commitment on Green Energy Investment - a plan which envisaged investing £28 Billion per year on green energy. This plan has had to be scaled back ( NOT abandoned ) because of a changed borrowing landscape, interest rates are rising, and UK Bond Yields are also rising, pushing up the cost of borrowing. I bet a pound to a penny that if Starmer HAD NOT ammended spending commitments due to the fiscal climate, there would undoubtably have been cries of "the figures dont add up" ... or ... "Labours reckless spending plans". I'll give him credit for that. When I heard it announced my immediate thought was it would spook the market and create another Lizz Truss scenario. I think he is likely now to become the next PM because it is looking increasingly the case that Sunak has not got a grip on the economy. His forecasts on inflation dropping so much are unlikely to materialise meaning we are going to see interest rates climb a lot higher than 5% and we are going to see many people lose their homes and the housing market crash, or else some stupid subsidy scheme that will make things even worse. Much that politicians all try and say we can insulate you from your fate, the truth is they can't. The housing market has been like a Ponzi scheme. To bring it back to a working market necessitates thousands being chucked out of their homes and them being repossessed. Their investments went bad. The cause of the trouble was some 20 years ago if you want someone to blame. I'm not even suggesting it was Labour's doing as the problem was in the financial industry and existed in the US as well. The rating agencies lied. People were misled, including politicians. |
|
|
|
Post by sheepy on Jun 23, 2023 16:55:16 GMT
No I am obviously listening to excuses for backing moving the goalposts. No goalpost here. Tell you what, seeing how you are so knowledgeable tell me how you think abolishing the Lords should be done. Would you shut them down on the first day, week, month......? Or would you wait until an agreed replacement was in place? What about all the legislation that is going through the Lords, would you just abandon it? What about the new legislation, would you be happy for it to go through on the 'nod'? What about the costs, salaries, guidlines.......? I await your answer with bated breath. Just close the place down with immediate effect, they cannot stop any legislation anyway, maybe delay it so best they are gone. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 24, 2023 6:11:42 GMT
No goalpost here. Tell you what, seeing how you are so knowledgeable tell me how you think abolishing the Lords should be done. Would you shut them down on the first day, week, month......? Or would you wait until an agreed replacement was in place? What about all the legislation that is going through the Lords, would you just abandon it? What about the new legislation, would you be happy for it to go through on the 'nod'? What about the costs, salaries, guidlines.......? I await your answer with bated breath. Just close the place down with immediate effect, they cannot stop any legislation anyway, maybe delay it so best they are gone. And chaos would ensue. It is though quite plain to see the 'promise' and the execution are worlds apart, haven't we had enough of 'reckless' governments screwing up our country? |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 24, 2023 12:56:54 GMT
Do supporters of this aimless, tired Tory government seriously believe that by Starmer ammending his commitments to suit changing (worsening) economic circumstances is somehow going to change anything. ?
Many of the opinion polls are now showing gaps of more than 20 points, as in for example IPSOS-MORI yesterday
LAB 47(+3) CON 25(-3).
Look at this Huffington Post headline from today ... "Sunakered: Tory Despair After Rishi's Worst Week Since The Last One"
"Even previously-optimistic Conservatives now think the next election is lost" (Kevin Schofield, Huffington Post)
The REAL promises and REAL election commitments will come with the election Manifesto, and these ar usually not released until the election, but people do have a general idea of direction.
I mean we could ask the same question(s) of Sunak, what are Tory plans after 2024 ?, probably more cuts to public services, even higher NHS waiting lists, more of the same ?, further falls in living standards, even higher mortgages, higher food prices. ?
Not a very good 13 year record at all
|
|
