The Labour Party Thread

[old fart]

The last time they did 'electoral reform' they saddled the nation with the nonsense of devolved parliaments and duds and retreads like Khan.

My goodness you missed out Livingstone, still the one bright part was that they prepared mayors for the top job,

[Loftyhammer]

Who appoints the people we get to choose from?

No idea yet…principle is a good one though …again, IMO

[Johnny Byrne's Boots]

If there are concerns about supremacy of the second chamber because it would be elected, then appoint a small number of members at random from the electoral register. That way it couldn't claim supremacy over a fully elected chamber.

[SammyLeeWasOffside]

No idea yet…principle is a good one though …again, IMO

The principle of abolishing hereditary peers was a good one. 25 years on how's it gone?

All that will happen is parties will stick the cronies into safe lords seats and call it democracy.

[Junco Partner]

Starmer is dead right about banning politicians from appointing Lords, it has to go

Johnson's crass and obvious rewarding mega-rich donors with peerages took this questionable process to whole new levels of corruption. That Truss gets to reward her clique of SPADs and donors for getting her 20 minutes as PM is equally scandalous.

Each new Lord costs us a small fortune....plus allowances and tax-free expenses every year for life, regardless of what they do. We can't go around adding more and more every year without any accountability. It's already the largest unelected legislative chamber in the world bar China, it needs drastically streamlined.

As for abolishing it, that's totally justified and a been longstanding Labour policy, the issue is mentioning it in isolation. The need for electoral reform is much, much more pressing if you're concerned about our democracy. Yet even doing that without having a long hard review of all our constitutional institutions, their role, powers, responsibilities and relationships is risky. Doing one bit of reform however well intentioned and needed can be damaging if you don't align it with reforming the other bits as well.

The need to write it all down in a rule-book stating which elected house has supremacy over which aspects of governance and legislation is one thing that must obviously follow making the 2nd chamber elected....may as well go the whole way and get our constitution written down too. Another dangerous chancer like Johnson will inevitably be along to distort and exploit its unwritten form unless we do.

[Tenbury]

That's flawed thinking.

You're just debating layers of government, rather than size.

'Govt is Violence' huh, Bubbles??..... I like it!

But I digress,... What are the latest polls looking like?

[Johnny Byrne's Boots]

I don't want a wrtten constitution, the way we sort of have an unwrtten one now is fine. I look at a supposed democracy across the Atlantic with a rigid written constitution, and I really don't want us to be like that.

[bubbles1966]

'Govt is Violence' huh, Bubbles??..... I like it!

But I digress,... What are the latest polls looking like?

Labour lead by 17 with Opinium, 21 with Ipsos. They are long term, established, reputable.

Never heard of the plethora of new pollsters.

[Loftyhammer]

The principle of abolishing hereditary peers was a good one. 25 years on how's it gone?

All that will happen is parties will stick the cronies into safe lords seats and call it democracy.

You’re making predictions on the mechanics of it, which is fine….I’ll wait until I see some detail before dismissing it

Or even fully supporting it

[SammyLeeWasOffside]

You’re making predictions on the mechanics of it, which is fine….I’ll wait until I see some detail before dismissing it

Or even fully supporting it

I wasn't predicting anything I was asking as I haven't read up on it. Presumably this has been thought through more than just the headline.

If it's an election then people will need to stand and run campaigns. The existing political parties are the ones with the mechanics to run those campaigns.

[Loftyhammer]

I wasn't predicting anything I was asking as I haven't read up on it. Presumably this has been thought through more than just the headline.

If it's an election then people will need to stand and run campaigns. The existing political parties are the ones with the mechanics to run those campaigns.

Apologies if I misread your quote...but when you said "All that will happen is....." then I took that as a prediction.

Anyway - I read it as some kind of elected chamber - and to your point; it's only a very high level statement at this stage (I think?)- loads of detail to flesh out - or at least share with the public. And might still be rubbish or unworkable

[delbert]

Saying the right things:

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-63707941

and upsetting the moon howlers:

https://socialistworker.co.uk/what-we-t ... migration/

He still has the difficult task of shifting his bandwagon jumping reputation, but at least he's upsetting the right people..........

[sendô]

I personally dont think the HoL needs abolishing, I just think it needs reforming. There's a lot to be said for a second chamber scrutinising and checking the HoC. Just look at the Brexit bills. It certainly needs reducing in number. All of the Lords spiritual can f*** off, and the hereditary Lords. I can't see that merely having another fully elected chamber akin to the HoC is any good for anyone, and I actually agree with bubbs that long term being elected will lend legitimacy to the HoL to having equal standing to the HoC unless it's properly codified in a constitution of sorts.

Personally I think there needs to be a root and branch overhaul of all layers of government. The powers and extent of the devolved parliaments, are they subordinate to the HoC or not? Mary Doll certainly doesn't think the Scottish parliament is. The numerous different types of councils, unitary authorities etc. How they are funded, differing levels of council tax, and not to mention the many mayors who do nothing but add another layer of
bureaucracy and give the government someone else to argue with/blame.

[Loftyhammer]

I personally dont think the HoL needs abolishing, I just think it needs reforming. There's a lot to be said for a second chamber scrutinising and checking the HoC. Just look at the Brexit bills. It certainly needs reducing in number. All of the Lords spiritual can **** off, and the hereditary Lords. I can't see that merely having another fully elected chamber akin to the HoC is any good for anyone, and I actually agree with bubbs that long term being elected will lend legitimacy to the HoL to having equal standing to the HoC unless it's properly codified in a constitution of sorts.

Personally I think there needs to be a root and branch overhaul of all layers of government. The powers and extent of the devolved parliaments, are they subordinate to the HoC or not? Mary Doll certainly doesn't think the Scottish parliament is. The numerous different types of councils, unitary authorities etc. How they are funded, differing levels of council tax, and not to mention the many mayors who do nothing but add another layer of
bureaucracy and give the government someone else to argue with/blame.

I think the "Abolishing House of Lords" is a very literal headline grabber; and the thinking is to retain an upper chamber but do away with the hereditary (and gifted) nature of the selection - which is pretty much what you've laid out. Don't disagree with your second para....but current politicians need to back it - and that always has a risk of being akin to turkeys voting for Xmas!

[OFT]

Too many in there with no obvious merit I agree but the idea of an elected HoL is hideous, see the USA.

[delbert]

The enemy within doing their best to keep them in opposition:

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/20 ... ims-abbott

[bubbles1966]

The enemy within doing their best to keep them in opposition:

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/20 ... ims-abbott

Starmer, Miliband, Cooper, Reeves, Thornberry.....

Procul Harum will be their election theme tune.

[Danny's Dyer Acting]

How does this work? Will Labour need to declare this advert on the front page of the Mail as a campaign contribution of some sort?

[sendô]

Wait, so you mean to tell me there's 200 businesses stuffed full of toffs not paying their fair share of VAT, and the Mail have just kindly exposed them?

I've clearly misjudged that publication.

[dave_l]

It’s a good headline and a decent idea in theory but I’d like to see what the impact will be on the state system of a sudden influx of kids from families who are just about affording the fees and couldn’t swallow the subsequent increase. What additional funding and space will be needed to accommodate them? In my experience, not every kid who goes to private school is the kid of a hedge fund manager or footballer.