Jump to content
House Price Crash Forum
Timm

Mps Rush To Hide From Electorate In House Of Lords

Recommended Posts

Apparently 52 MPs have so far requested a seat in the lords. The implication is that these will be those that expect to be voted out of the commons at the first opportunity. People shout at me when I call for a return to selection by accident of birth for the upper house, but would not that be better than selection by democratic de-selection?

http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/2009/ma...n-labour-crisis

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The whole lot is corupt up to the eye balls and mo tweaking exspence claims is nothing to the bribes they are taking and even when caught nothing gets done because the police and judges are in on it.

Sorry mass cival disobedance and revolution is the only way forward as i see it and just think how nice it will be to drive at a safe speed without being forced to crawl just so they can send you a fine and look at what you can do with the savings in taxes each month.

Gov's propaganda says you need them ! i don't think you do when they are in your face, in your pocket and now they want us all chiped & pinned.

Can i say hala, semtex and kill just so GCHQ read it please!

Edited by Justice

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Exactly why that place should be disbanded then fully elected. It's full of unaccountable crooks :-

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/8060003.stm

Disbanded yes. Replaced by something as corrupt as the commons: Why?

EDIT: both of the peers that link refers to were elected by democratic vote before being elevated to the upper house.

Edited by Timm

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Our democratic system was designed to have hereditary peers, and this was changed a relatively short time ago, having worked quite successfully for about 300 years.

Look at the crap in the Lords now, with 4 socialist peers bringing the house into disrepute.

I bet the integrity of the House would be in no doubt if hereditary peers were reintroduced. It would stop the like of Gordon Brown infesting the place with this socialist/ Marxist scum. I bet that's why is was designed like that in the first place. You could not infiltrate party politics. It's supposed to be safety net for democracy, in case the House of Commons wanders too far from the democratic process. How can it accomplish this if you can manipulate the place with planted politicians?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I like the idea of replacing the house of lords with randomly selected members of the public. Like a jury but with the right to refuse duty. No massive perks, just a good (high) salary and perhaps publicly owned apartment near Westminster.

Imagine how effective it might have been over the last decade. No war in Iraq, a referendum on Lisbon, no ID cards. Fantastic.

Of course that would be true power to the people and is therefore completely unacceptable to the establishment.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I like the idea of replacing the house of lords with randomly selected members of the public. Like a jury but with the right to refuse duty. No massive perks, just a good (high) salary and perhaps publicly owned apartment near Westminster.

Imagine how effective it might have been over the last decade. No war in Iraq, a referendum on Lisbon, no ID cards. Fantastic.

Of course that would be true power to the people and is therefore completely unacceptable to the establishment.

I like that idea too.

I think there will be a bloody revolution if troughing MP's get rewarded with a seat in the Lords on top of their HoC pensions. We live in hope, cos then we can play "hunt down the bankers!"

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I wouldn't put it past MPs to offer bribes in a new cash for honours scandal - and claim the payment as an expense!

Many if not all of these MPs are lobbyists for powerful VIs so you can bet they'll fight tooth and claw to retain influence in the capital.

Westminster is the new Washington.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

MP rushes to hide in hairdressers . . .

MP does a runner after being quizzed on £19k food expenses claim

6:30pm Thursday 28th May 2009

MP DAVID Amess ran from the Echo to avoid questions after his expenses showed he claimed the maximum of £400 for food every month for the past four years.

The Tory MP sought refuge in a hairdressers’ as he tried to duck the issue.

He eventually made his escape when a car arrived at the salon in Westcliff and drove him away, with Mr Amess hiding his face behind a leaflet.

The Southend West MP’s extraordinary actions came after it emerged he claimed the maximum £19,000 on expenses for food over the past four years.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I like the idea of replacing the house of lords with randomly selected members of the public. Like a jury but with the right to refuse duty. No massive perks, just a good (high) salary and perhaps publicly owned apartment near Westminster.

Imagine how effective it might have been over the last decade. No war in Iraq, a referendum on Lisbon, no ID cards. Fantastic.

Of course that would be true power to the people and is therefore completely unacceptable to the establishment.

One rather big problem here - there are some remarkably stupid "members of the public" out there. Not sure I would want to be governed by a "random selection" of them.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Apparently 52 MPs have so far requested a seat in the lords. The implication is that these will be those that expect to be voted out of the commons at the first opportunity. People shout at me when I call for a return to selection by accident of birth for the upper house, but would not that be better than selection by democratic de-selection?

http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/2009/ma...n-labour-crisis

I'd agree, while many criticised the old system for its birth priveleges I don't remeber there being much criticism for the decisions the lords took.... good old Tony Blair replaced it with a corrupt system that doesn't work... I still don't see much criticism of blair.... a lot of the stuff brown is getting it in the neck comes down to that idiot blair.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I'd agree, while many criticised the old system for its birth priveleges I don't remeber there being much criticism for the decisions the lords took.... good old Tony Blair replaced it with a corrupt system that doesn't work... I still don't see much criticism of blair.... a lot of the stuff brown is getting it in the neck comes down to that idiot blair.

Exactly, what is better:

An unfair system that works, and protects the populous from the worst idiocies of power hungry liars,

Or a fairer system where the public get to elect more power hungry liars?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Exactly, what is better:

An unfair system that works, and protects the populous from the worst idiocies of power hungry liars,

If only lol

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I like the idea of replacing the house of lords with randomly selected members of the public. Like a jury but with the right to refuse duty. No massive perks, just a good (high) salary and perhaps publicly owned apartment near Westminster.

Imagine how effective it might have been over the last decade. No war in Iraq, a referendum on Lisbon, no ID cards. Fantastic.

Of course that would be true power to the people and is therefore completely unacceptable to the establishment.

what makes you think that thick people are more honest than clever people?

Or more likely to make good decisions for that matter?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I'd agree, while many criticised the old system for its birth priveleges I don't remeber there being much criticism for the decisions the lords took.... good old Tony Blair replaced it with a corrupt system that doesn't work... I still don't see much criticism of blair.... a lot of the stuff brown is getting it in the neck comes down to that idiot blair.

I got the impression that Brown ploughed his own furrow in the Treasury. Wnything economic you can lay at the door of GB.

Was the PFI/PPP one of his?

There was plenty of criticism from the left of the House Of Lords. It was very "Establishment", although I recall them being a thorn in the side of Mrs Fatch a few times.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

  • The Prime Minister stated that there were three Brexit options available to the UK:   287 members have voted

    1. 1. Which of the Prime Minister's options would you choose?


      • Leave with the negotiated deal
      • Remain
      • Leave with no deal

    Please sign in or register to vote in this poll. View topic


×

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.