Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 28, 2022 12:16:44 GMT
Blair did the most he could realistically get away with at the time. Largely we agree on the need for reform if we disagree on the precise ideal format of that reform. Starmer seems to agree too. Hopefully it will be part of an overall constitutional reform package which includes PR and hence re-enfranchises the majority of the population who live in safe seats and those currently feeling forced to vote tactically. I don't see it as being number one priority on the list of things to be done once the Tories lose power, but hopefully something that can be done in the first term. I mostly agree but observe the fact that Starmer wants power and does not back PR for that reason. He is only likely to concede on PR if he needs to for power, ie he needs the support of other parties. A thoroughly hung parliament with Labour as the largest party and the Tories lacking the numbers to form a viable government with anyone else themselves is therefore my fervent hope. It is the only chance I see of us getting PR. |
|
|
|
Post by dappy on Nov 28, 2022 12:32:10 GMT
My guess is that any Labour government will move towards PR in next parliament if only for pragmatic purposes - currently the progressive side of politics habitually splits its vote while the conservative side doesnt which disadvantages that side and PR would allow/force the Tory party to split into its centrist and libertarian wings which would be to Labour's long term advantage. Of course Labour may also split between blairite and corbynite wings but I think that might be a price worth paying.
Its not a bad thing for leader of either main party to want power -its how you get to deliver the improvements you want.
I think the best outcome for post the next election (and into the foreseeable future) is a Labour lead minority government too.
|
|
|
|
Post by bancroft on Nov 28, 2022 12:52:11 GMT
There are two types of PR for me.
If we are going to have one that allows MPs to have seats on a list basis based on national vote that is good.
If instead it is just one that ensure more of the same parties progress, what is the point.
The first one we are unlikely to get it would have meant the BNP and UKIP yet also the Greens getting seats in previous parliaments
|
|
|
|
Post by dappy on Nov 28, 2022 13:19:22 GMT
While I disagree with their policies, it is absolutely right that UKIP and BNP and Greens should get representation in HoC if they have enough votes to justify it. That's democracy.
There are some issues (how do you keep an MP representing a defined area, how do you include regional parties (SNP, Plaid, "Yorkshire Party" etc) but I think the benefits outweigh the disadvantages. I might be inclined to go for the DeHondt style Euro election model but it would be interesting to see what that threw out of the next actual election results - would it overall approximate pure PR outcome.
|
|
|
|
Post by thomas on Nov 29, 2022 8:19:53 GMT
i deal in fact and truth.
Does the english language word "abolish" somehow morph into" tinker" in the labour party bible of poor attempts at sophistry and historical revision?
I would argue however bad the original lifelong peers sitting on the family name in the lords was , and of course a relic of the feudal age , it was better than the current system that tony wanted of stacking the lords with his blairite toadies.
Nothing more hilarious( if it wasnt so sad) of watching champagne socialists and former republicans like darling sit in the lords as a labour party today.
..and you wonder why the people of the uk despise your party?
i stand by everything i have said. Labour have been promising to abolish the house of lords for a century if not more.
Take action to abolish the undemocratic House of Lords as quickly as possible
and here we have starmers latest weasel words on the subject....
Keir Starmer: I will abolish House of Lords to ‘restore trust in politics’
I would argue tony blairs failed tinkering of the lords left us ( as ever) in an even greater mess than before , with the lords being stacked with labour party toadies .
Anyone believeing these labour party clowns on stuff like abolishing the lords needs their heads examined.
|
|
|
|
Post by Pacifico on Nov 29, 2022 8:21:55 GMT
The funny thing about Blairs 'reforms' of the Lords was that it left the remaining Hereditary Peers as the only ones there with any actual democratic legitimacy.
|
|
|
|
Post by thomas on Nov 29, 2022 8:25:48 GMT
Such will be the dilemma the english voter will face at the next general election . Do they put starmer into power to punish the tories , and suffer another wave a tax and spend , mass immigration and the humiliation of being taken back into the eu as a supplicant?###
Choices choices.
politics is getting more and more interesting and enjoyable.
In the most extremely unlikely circumstances where the UK was taken back into the EU, it would and could only happen if it was the will of the people. # spits out coffee#
For an aobjective and extremely impartial view on the matter and other political issues , we know who to come to dont we?
See 2 , the innocent bystander and extremely impartial objective poster who wishes to tell us without prejudice what a nice man that keir starmer is .
Im praying starmer does what i and many others think he is going to do , take the uk back in by the back door and attempt to secretly tie the uk in bit by bit .
You know , i used to think it nothing more than the overbearing arrognace of the dimwits in the labour party and how they thought everyone else was more stupid than they.....but now? Im conviced they actually believe the total guff they spout on a daily basis.
|
|
|
|
Post by thomas on Nov 29, 2022 8:28:10 GMT
The funny thing about Blairs 'reforms' of the Lords was that it left the remaining Hereditary Peers as the only ones there with any actual democratic legitimacy. What blair done was a complete disaster. The tinkering of the lords wasnt done for democracy , or the beneift of the uk. It was done to salve the conscience of one man and his ego , and so he could sell his poor attempt as reform as some poor attempt at honouring manifesto commitments.
|
|
|
|
Post by thomas on Nov 29, 2022 8:28:47 GMT
i deal in fact and truth.
Does the english language word "abolish" somehow morph into" tinker" in the labour party bible of poor attempts at sophistry and historical revision?
I would argue however bad the original lifelong peers sitting on the family name in the lords was , and of course a relic of the feudal age , it was better than the current system that tony wanted of stacking the lords with his blairite toadies.
Nothing more hilarious( if it wasnt so sad) of watching champagne socialists and former republicans like darling sit in the lords as a labour party today.
..and you wonder why the people of the uk despise your party?
That the House of Lords contained hundreds of legislators who inherited their positions is indefensible in the eyes of democracy. That most of them were Tory supporters with a tendency to vote for self-interest - as the poll tax vote demonstrated - just added to that. The fact that 25 years later there are still 92 hereditaries is a shocking indictment of New Labour's half arsed reforms. Blairs problem like that of the Tories who followed him is that he liked the powers of patronage to reward his cronies too much. The Tories have taken it to another level, using appointments to the Lords to reward party donors. The relationship between prime ministers and parties on the one hand, and the Lords on the other has become brazenly corrupt. Whether any reforms are democratic or not, something seriously has to change. I favour democratic accountability, though I also note that in European parliaments second chambers are often wholly or partly indirectly elected by elected local representatives. But even that would be a vast improvement on the corrupt set up we have now. I also acknowledge that there are ways of retaining an appointed chamber of some kind that could greatly reduce if not eliminate the scope for politically motivated corruption, and some have been suggested in this thread. But sadly I don't believe that a power hungry politician like Starmer is serious about serious reform. He will I suspect want to retain the inherently corrupt power of patronage, just like Blair did. I doubt the seriousness of intent here and this is probably just another false promise designed to appease more progressive elements in his own party. But any serious proposals for reform that do emerge I will study and consider on what I regard to be their own merits. Most forms of reform one can imagine can only be an improvement on the system as it is now. good post steve. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 29, 2022 9:12:12 GMT
The funny thing about Blairs 'reforms' of the Lords was that it left the remaining Hereditary Peers as the only ones there with any actual democratic legitimacy. Barely. They are only voted for by their peers. So that hardly counts as democratic legitimacy |
|
|
|
Post by see2 on Nov 29, 2022 11:11:23 GMT
When the Labour Party came to power in the 1997 general election, it had in its manifesto the promise to reform the House of Lords:
i stand by everything i have said. Labour have been promising to abolish the house of lords for a century if not more.
Take action to abolish the undemocratic House of Lords as quickly as possible
and here we have starmers latest weasel words on the subject....
Keir Starmer: I will abolish House of Lords to ‘restore trust in politics’
I would argue tony blairs failed tinkering of the lords left us ( as ever) in an even greater mess than before , with the lords being stacked with labour party toadies .
Anyone believeing these labour party clowns on stuff like abolishing the lords needs their heads examined.
Your point about Labour historically wanting to abolish the HoL's is not in dispute and has already been addressed. Before Blair changed things The Lords was full of mostly Tories who remained there for no other reason than they had inherited the position. They were the reason why there has been an historical call for it to be abolished. Starmer wants to change the Lords into an elected chamber, so not abolishing the job of a second chamber. A very different position to the historical call for it to be abolished. Also, my point was that the Last Labour Government did not promise to abolish the house of Lords. Your claim ^^ is both wrong and ridiculous pointing to the fact that you do not understand the timing, the balancing up, the improvements or the reason for the changes made by Blair. Anyone who posted the likes of your last line above, needs to drop a load of bias and acquire a good load of commonsense. |
|
|
|
Post by see2 on Nov 29, 2022 11:22:33 GMT
The funny thing about Blairs 'reforms' of the Lords was that it left the remaining Hereditary Peers as the only ones there with any actual democratic legitimacy. The vastly reduced number of remaining Hereditary Peers were left on a limited period agreement, they are not supposed to permanent and they cannot hand on the right to sit in the House as inherited Peers to their offspring. So that system will die out anyway. |
|
|
|
Post by see2 on Nov 29, 2022 11:31:13 GMT
In the most extremely unlikely circumstances where the UK was taken back into the EU, it would and could only happen if it was the will of the people. # spits out coffee#
For an aobjective and extremely impartial view on the matter and other political issues , we know who to come to dont we?
See 2 , the innocent bystander and extremely impartial objective poster who wishes to tell us without prejudice what a nice man that keir starmer is .
Im praying starmer does what i and many others think he is going to do , take the uk back in by the back door and attempt to secretly tie the uk in bit by bit .
You know , i used to think it nothing more than the overbearing arrognace of the dimwits in the labour party and how they thought everyone else was more stupid than they.....but now? Im conviced they actually believe the total guff they spout on a daily basis.
Do you really think that any UK government has the ability to take the UK back into the EU without a referendum? Your childish desire to post insults suggests that your politics are (typically) right-wing and says so much about your immaturity. |
|
|
|
Post by Fairsociety on Nov 29, 2022 11:37:51 GMT
Is there anything Starmer isn't going to do if he becomes Prime Minister lol
So far he's doing away with the House of Lords, having no economic migrants, putting pay to private schools charitable status, what's he going to promise us next?
The sad part is, people might actually believe him.
|
|
|
|
Post by Pacifico on Nov 29, 2022 11:49:44 GMT
The funny thing about Blairs 'reforms' of the Lords was that it left the remaining Hereditary Peers as the only ones there with any actual democratic legitimacy. Barely. They are only voted for by their peers. So that hardly counts as democratic legitimacy How many of the other Peers are voted for at all? |
|
