Cameron has created 117 Lords in last year.

[HeadingNorth]

Seeing as we're never going to get a real version of PR, and none of them are exactly 100% fair, at least we could try and have a more representative upper house - what about picking people randomly from the electoral register, for fixed terms, a bit like jury service but people can say 'no' if they wish.

 

Scrutiny of law isn't a thing you can pick up the ability to do overnight. Ideally you want someone who's going to keep at the job for fifty years, and who gears his whole education towards that end. And since random selection is what you're suggesting - we really should go back to having them selected by accident of birth. Nothing is more random than your choice of parents.

[Kaimani]

Scrutiny of law isn't a thing you can pick up the ability to do overnight. Ideally you want someone who's going to keep at the job for fifty years, and who gears his whole education towards that end. And since random selection is what you're suggesting - we really should go back to having them selected by accident of birth. Nothing is more random than your choice of parents.

 

my bold. odd, don't you think.

sorry, couldn't resist. must be growing into a very bad troll. but, you're right. as much as it annoys me if we're going to have a HOL at all we might as well have it from people 'who know the way of the world', as so to speak. random selection would caught up some things that would be funny if it wasn't so important. and five years is too short to 'learn' everything you need to know about kickbacks, brown envelopes, moats etc.

[Darth Vader]

Scrutiny of law isn't a thing you can pick up the ability to do overnight.

 

If the public are trusted to sit on a jury, then adopt the same system where professionals are employed to brief them. Many members of the Lords aren't the 'smartest tools in the box'.

 

Ideally you want someone who's going to keep at the job for fifty years.

 

I don't want that, I want people who have had experience doing lots of other things.

 

And since random selection is what you're suggesting - we really should go back to having them selected by accident of birth. Nothing is more random than your choice of parents.

 

I can't think of anything less random, than relying entirely on those who are born in to privilege and have little or no understanding of life for the majority of people in this country, having the power to shape our laws.

[WeX]

how many lords did tony blair sell create?

[smithy266]

if you can tun a mile, you can become a Lord: if you are big and fat,and hit people you can become a Lord...... I have no chance!

[WeX]

and aren't all lords created by the pm through the queen, including lords from other parties such as prescott etc

[alchresearch]

As the new Lords are a cross party mix - including a fair number of Labour - I can't see the problem.

 

And who is the "independent Constitution Unit at University College London" and who are the "13 peers" who have approved the report?

[Eater Sundae]

I think the labour government made a right mess of Lords reform. They should never have destroyed the old system UNTIL they had got a new one to replace it with. Not that the coalition is any better. They don't seem to be sorting it out.

 

Both parties try and fill the Lords with their cronies. They are as bad as each other.

 

If it were my choice -

 

I'd decide how many we needed (a lot less than there is now, and less than there are MPs, say 200). Every current Lord would remain in place until he/she dies, chose to retire or were certified as being incapable.

 

Only when the current crop has died back to the required number (200) would we then start recruiting more. As soon as, say, 10 spaces became available then each political party would nominate people based on the number of votes that party received in the last election. Say the labour party got 38% of the votes, then they would get 4 nominees.

 

Once made a Lord, this would be for life - this is important. Once in place, the member would be a free agent, to vote as they saw fit. If they were at risk of losing their seat in 5 years, they would be forced to kow-tow to "their" party, in which case the Lords would be a waste of time. They should be independent.

 

I've forgotten the exact wording of what the Lords is supposed to do - but basically it is to keep a steadying hand on parliament. To do this, I think it should be naturally conservative (with a very small 'c'). I think my system could provide this, it would be naturally slow changing, but would always be heading in line with the view of the country.

 

Edit: btw, all 'my' new members of the House of Lords would be paid a wage, and expected to attend and earn it. They could leave at any time they wanted.

[taxman]

 

I'd decide how many we needed (a lot less than there is now, and less than there are MPs, say 200). Every current Lord would remain in place until he/she dies, chose to retire or were certified as being incapable.

 

 

Incapable of what? Remaining awake? Controling their bladders?

[Grandad.Malky]

Incapable of what? Remaining awake? Controling their bladders?

 

 

If there is a crucial vote they wheel them out of their sickbeds to make the numbers up.