Jump to content

Should we follow suit?


Recommended Posts

The Lords has blocked some very stupid laws that would otherwise become law.

 

Lords block Chris Grayling's plans to let private companies supervise ex-prisoners

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/10142022/Lords-block-Chris-Graylings-plans-to-let-private-companies-supervise-ex-prisoners.html

 

House of Lords blocks 'shares for rights' plan

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-21871106

 

The Lords are not landed gentry, but rather pillars of industry bringing a wealth of experience that is quickly disappearing from the house of commons.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

i thought he would be wrong somehow :hihi:

 

Did you, well I am right. You get paid nothing but you can claim a daily allowance for the days in which you attend a sitting. So if you're Lord John Prescott living in Hull, £300 just about covers your travel expenses.

 

Anyway, back to the OP. Yes get rid. Don't see the point of two houses, also think the number of MPs should be reduced.

 

---------- Post added 02-10-2013 at 15:51 ----------

 

One area were we don't seem to have seen much in the way of cuts is politics, and there's a lot to weed out.

 

Let's see some of the Lord's daily allowances reduced. What about reducing MPs expenses (and no, they haven't done it already.) A crack down on the number of advisers and advisers pay. (Weren't they supposed to be getting rid of the Quangos - they've gone up.) Reduce the number of MPs. Cut the number of civil servants in Whitehall especially those on £100,000 +

That's just for starters, the list goes on, and don't get me started on the European Parliament.

 

These people are so enthusiastic about spending our money. After we've made politics affordable, we could have a crack at the BBC.

 

Why would you cut the number of civil servants when you are always going on about cut to the public sector? They are paid over 100k because they have the responsibility of billions of pounds of budget and running the country.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The Lords has blocked some very stupid laws that would otherwise become law.

 

Now thats not true at all.

 

The first one was a Bill that got knocked back in the first reading, which is an early stage in the process.

 

The second one doesn't even appear to have been anything other than abit of policy, but they took a vote on it and knocked it down anyway.

 

Although they were both totally stupid, neither would 'otherwise become law' both were very much in the stages of infancy and wouldn't have made it through in that form.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Now thats not true at all.

 

The first one was a Bill that got knocked back in the first reading, which is an early stage in the process.

 

The second one doesn't even appear to have been anything other than abit of policy, but they took a vote on it and knocked it down anyway.

 

Although they were both totally stupid, neither would 'otherwise become law' both were very much in the stages of infancy and wouldn't have made it through in that form.

 

they where examples of the lords knocking back items that had passed the commons.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.