Do you approve of unelected Ministers?

I also agree with varian and pogs who points out that labour has done a similar thing.

Nothing to do with Brexit. All to do with suiting the party in power.

You made some interesting points varian.

However, it does seem to have been a race in recent years to see which of the political parties can appoint the most of their ex-MPs or members to the HoL.

Two wrongs have never made a right. IMO the fact that Labour appointed people to the HoL doesn't make it right that Goldsmith and Morgan have been.

I'm fed up with tit-for-tat politics. I'd rather look at the principles behind such actions. It took hundreds of years to achieve universal suffrage, but now it looks as though people are prepared to turn a blind eye to the creation of a "new" aristocracy.

I agree with varian too. I have no problem with "wise men and women" (those pesky experts) putting their heads together and keeping an eye on what the HoC gets up to, but this is making a mockery of it.

Both sides do this, as has been pointed out. It should not be a question just for Brexiteers and just shows that some Remoaners do not know their facts.

Everyone, whether they agree with it or not, needs to accept what path a democratic vote has now chosen for the UK; one that has been decided now knowing more about Brexit after the referendum more than 3 years ago, as they claimed ( falsely) stupid Leavers didn't understand before.

Personally, I would like to see the House of Lords abolished and would welcome more public referenda on important issues, including bringing back the death penalty but that is a different discussion.

…..and would welcome more public referenda on important issues, including bringing back the death penalty but that is a different discussion....this is a joke, right....????

Lets not have a government; lets just have a referendum on everything. No information just a yes no on everything, including bringing back the death penalty. Lets make the country even more vile than it is now, shall we....….

I don't care who has done it! - Labour/Tory whoever - it is just plain wrong!!!

I get really fed up when someone criticises the government for some twisting of democracy (or whatever) and someone else pipes up that Labour has done it too! What the heck has that got to do with it??!! - it is still wrong!

While we're about it let's have all our ministers resign and pretend they are getting out of politics. We can elect a celebrity PM and then the ministers can all come back as peers. After all everyone is fed up of party politics.

"Public referenda" on more things! - may the good lord preserve us!

A referendum was carried out on Brexit, but NO objective information was supplied to voters - there should have been such a leaflet through every single letterbox.

Do I feel qualified to make a decision about the big issues facing us? Of course not and I am highly educated - educated enough to know that I do not know everything about everything. If there were more referenda I would spend half my time mulling up on the relevant subject. And after one or two, the public would be demanding a referendum on everything under the sun!

The whole point of having elected representatives is that this is their job.

The current problem is that the high-up representatives can not be trusted.

Well, it has been said that not all Brexit voters are racist but all racists are Brexit voters so I now assume the survey that said people who voted Brexit are more likely to want the reintroduction of the death penalty is correct. I was rather hoping it wasn't.

Boris Johnson may only have 43.6% of the votes but he can do what he likes

Although I am not a fan of inherited privilege, I do see the need for a second chamber to check some of the more outrageous requests from the HoC, but I would like to see this second chamber staff by people with life and business experience, members of various religions etc., not just jobsworths who have spent 40 years doing the job in the civil service which they have been paid for. I have absolutely no idea at all why Goldsmith has been elevated; frankly everything he has tried has been a failure, he lost two elections, lost London Mayoral bid ( and was seen to be rather a nasty racist in the process), he may be an environmentalist, but so are the hardworking members of the Green Party and they have not received the same 'honour'. As neither Morgan nor Goldsmith have any special skills, talent or experience I can only conclude they know where the bodies are buried. We need a hollow laugh emoticon on here, in reply to all those Brexit supporters who cited unelected representation as one of their reasons for voting us into the abyss. quizqueen please stop using childish terminology like remoaners, it is irritating.

"quizqueen please stop using childish terminology like remoaners, it is irritating."

I suspect that's why she does it Gill

It's one thing to elevate people to the HOC where they may have some useful input on various subjects. It is quite another to deliberately place them there so that they can continue in office after being voted out by the public.

But old Etonians have to stick together, y'know...

Any Government should be elected by the people.

An Upper House is essential but I have always thought should be an elected body; however varian's point about attracting people with experience and expertise in certain fields is a good idea but perhaps as an adviser, not a Minister.

not just jobsworths who have spent 40 years doing the job in the civil service which they have been paid for
Civil servants may well have vast experience in their fields and may be extremely knowledgeable. They will know far more about their department than any MP or Minister.

I agree Callistemon. £300 a day for somebody who really knows his/her stuff is actually cheap compared with a management consultant.

As you may know - Plato did not have high regard for democracy (The Republic), He said ''Philosopher Kings'' i.e. intelligent, educated, enlightened, absolute rulers gave best government.

growstuff although I think they employ management consultants at vast expense too, then abandon the projects on the grounds of cost, having spent £millions on consultations - sometimes more than one!

That wouldn't surprise me, but the role of the HoL should be to scrutinise bills, etc, in the same way all-party parliamentary groups do.

I'm not defending the HoL as it currently is because there's too much dead wood, but I do think the country needs a second house, as an insurance policy against dictatorship and other reasons.

I'm totally against hereditary peerages and packing the HoL with political appointments. Maybe they should be selected by a cross-party group on the basis of what they can contribute to intelligent and rational debate (it would make a change to what often goes on in the HoC ) and maybe only for a limited time (ten years?).