House of Lords reform
House of Lords reform
House of Lords reform
House of Lords reform
House of Lords reform
House of Lords reform
House of Lords reform
House of Lords reform
House of Lords reform
House of Lords reform
House of Lords reform
House of Lords reform
House of Lords reform
House of Lords reform
House of Lords reform
House of Lords reform
House of Lords reform
House of Lords reform
We have a representative body – The Commons. We have achieved representation; we have achieved Democracy.
Democracy has one major fault: Party Politics. This (plus any twit can get elected) is why we need a true Senate.
You can't revise a house full of people allied to party dogma with a house full of people dis-informed by The Daily Mail!
When forming any solution, it's important to regularly refer back to the problem: what ultimately are we trying to achieve?
House of Lords reform
House of Lords reform
@krans I agree with this and have been suggesting the same for years. It'd be much more representative of our society. As long as the resignation/refusal part isn't gamed/weaponised to "encourage" resignations from some groups more than others e.g. from historically disadvantaged groups.
I was with you up to half way through this point :)
> Appointing members from chartered professional bodies and learned societies enshrines existing systematic inequalities.
How so?
We have a House of Representatives (Commons) to represent the will of the people. To revise we need a true Senate–a house of non-partisan 'elders'–to represent logical reasoning.
Don't throw the baby out with the bathwater: remove hereditary and ex-PMs cronies. Keep what's left. A Senate. Job done.