HeadingNorth Posted July 10, 2012 Share Posted July 10, 2012 For the record, more details here. In fact the reform bill has not been scuppered at all. What has been removed is the plan to limit debate on the bill to only ten days. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wednesday1 Posted July 10, 2012 Author Share Posted July 10, 2012 If the Labour opposition had supported reform, we wouldn't need a Labour government to enact reform; it would have been done now. Ergo, point-scoring. Indeed, you openly admit that this was the idea; not only that, you actually seem to approve of it. I take that you, also, are more concerned with point scoring than with doing what's good for the country. Lol!!! Since when has a ConDem caused, double-dip recession been good for the country! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bladesman Posted July 10, 2012 Share Posted July 10, 2012 If the Labour opposition had supported reform, we wouldn't need a Labour government to enact reform; it would have been done now. Ergo, point-scoring. Indeed, you openly admit that this was the idea; not only that, you actually seem to approve of it. I take that you, also, are more concerned with point scoring than with doing what's good for the country. It took you til now to work that out? He has been doing this point scoring crap for years on this forum. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lounge Jay Posted July 10, 2012 Share Posted July 10, 2012 All this talk of "laws being made by unelected people" is crap; the house of lords is merely a revising chamber...the commons always has the final say. I say leave the house of lords alone, but if it must be reformed, then do away with the remaining hereditary peers and leave it at that...an elected HoL is a terrible idea in my opinion. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wednesday1 Posted July 10, 2012 Author Share Posted July 10, 2012 It took you til now to work that out? He has been doing this point scoring crap for years on this forum. Thanks for that well thought out contribution. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wednesday1 Posted July 10, 2012 Author Share Posted July 10, 2012 All this talk of "laws being made by unelected people" is crap; the house of lords is mereley a revising chamber...the commons always has the final say. I say leave the house of lords alone, but if it must be reformed, then do away with the remaining hereditary peers and leave it at that...an elected HoL is a terrible idea in my opinion. HoL reform is the last thing on most peoples radar at the moment, it was going to be Cleggs legacy. The only enduring legacy the clown will be left with is, is that he jumped into bed with the devil and destroyed his own party! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HeadingNorth Posted July 10, 2012 Share Posted July 10, 2012 Lol!!! Since when has a ConDem caused, double-dip recession been good for the country! This vote was about Lords reform. You clearly knew that; you started the thread; so why are you dissimulating by trying to argue about something else? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wednesday1 Posted July 10, 2012 Author Share Posted July 10, 2012 This vote was about Lords reform. You clearly knew that; you started the thread; so why are you dissimulating by trying to argue about something else? The Cons were never going to give Clegg any meaningful reform, if he had any political nous he would have realised this. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hard2miss Posted July 10, 2012 Share Posted July 10, 2012 They were intending to vote against reform of the house of Lords; that does not suggest that they are going to reform it. It does suggest that they care more about political point-scoring than what's actually good for the country. They intended to vote against the time set out for the debate and not against the actual reform as you are saying. They are still for reform but a lot of people just happen to think that while the economy is in the gutter we should put all the time and effort into that. The vote that the PM pulled out of was about the time the bill would need to have it debated. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HeadingNorth Posted July 10, 2012 Share Posted July 10, 2012 The Cons were never going to give Clegg any meaningful reform, if he had any political nous he would have realised this. If Labour had supported the reform that they claim to support, he wouldn't have needed the help of the Tory rebels. Which leaves us to wonder, why are people who claim to support Labour's policies, happy that Labour have voted against their own policy? Are all Labour supporters as hypocritical as that? Or are they just gullible? Or, in fact, do you not represent the majority of Labour supporters? Maybe most Labour supporters would have preferred Labour to actually vote in favour of something it supports. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.