Johnson's Peerages

He’s only making them peers on the understanding that they will vote for the government.

This country goes from bad to worse.

For what it's worth all 10 pledges should be stuck to.

Gordon Brown has today
1) exposed Corrupt tory plans to pack out the House of Lords;
2) demanded fundamental constitutional change; and,
3) proposed Keir Starmer sticks to his pledge
Worth a close read
theguardian.com/politics/2022/jul/29/keir-starmer-urged-not-to-abandon-pledge-to-abolish-house-of-lords

He shouldn't be nominating any peers at all. He is a disgraced PM. He was 'removed' because his parliamentary party couldn't stand his lying and corruption any longer (and, I suspect, because they say his approval rating with the public hit rock bottom). He has dishonoured the position of PM.

He is also under investigation by the Privileges Committee for lying to the House. If he is found to have done so and is suspended from Parliament (not literally, unfortunately) that will be further proof of his dishonouring of the post and that his judgement in the matter of nominations for peerage is not to be trusted in any way.

The proposals revealed in the article are just a further step in the destruction of our constitution and government accountability.

I am utterly ??? that this is even being proposed and that Johnson's advisor thinks it's achievable.

Grany

For what it's worth all 10 pledges should be stuck to.

Gordon Brown has today
1) exposed Corrupt tory plans to pack out the House of Lords;
2) demanded fundamental constitutional change; and,
3) proposed Keir Starmer sticks to his pledge
Worth a close read
theguardian.com/politics/2022/jul/29/keir-starmer-urged-not-to-abandon-pledge-to-abolish-house-of-lords

Never miss a chance for a pop at Keir, do you, Grany?

Could the House of Lords abolish Starmer? Could they abolish each other?

We might then be able to acquire a Labour Party leader who isn't singing from a 1980s Conservative Song-List (and getting both the audience and the tune wrong).

Accountable democracy in this country relies on having (at least) two parties each of whom can challenge the power of the other.

I thought Tony Bliar was a disaster for labour supporters. But Starmer hadn't emerged from the primordial slime at that point.

Gordon Brown is a light in the darkness,

Vintagenonna

Could the House of Lords abolish Starmer? Could they abolish each other?

We might then be able to acquire a Labour Party leader who isn't singing from a 1980s Conservative Song-List (and getting both the audience and the tune wrong).

Accountable democracy in this country relies on having (at least) two parties each of whom can challenge the power of the other.

I thought Tony Bliar was a disaster for labour supporters. But Starmer hadn't emerged from the primordial slime at that point.

Gordon Brown is a light in the darkness,

Can I report posts for immediate deviation from the subject of the OP?

I know threads wander, but this is ludicrous.

We are talking about the most corrupt and destructive PM the UK has ever had and you want to moan about Starmer?

This feels exactly like Trump filling the US Supreme Court with his cronies. We're already seeing the rotten outcome of that.

At lunch yesterday with two lifelong friends who are dyed in the wool Conservative voters. Both said they could no longer support the corruption of this government, the running of the country into the ground and the widening of the gap between rich and poor.

They will vote Labour at the next election.

To be honest MaizieDin the opinion of almost everyone I know Starmer has been an enabler of the tory fiasco .He has abstained and supported the worst government in my lifetime and in the lifetimes of friends in their 80's and 90's .IF he had the- balls- comittment to the people of this country that should be expected of a labour leader he would have at the very least mad eBojo's destruction of democracy a wee bit harder ...but no Starmer let him reign free of opposition.Apart from the Scottish National Party ,whose votes in WM count for bugger all .Democracy is dead and Starmer is a liability

RichmondPark1

This feels exactly like Trump filling the US Supreme Court with his cronies. We're already seeing the rotten outcome of that.

At lunch yesterday with two lifelong friends who are dyed in the wool Conservative voters. Both said they could no longer support the corruption of this government, the running of the country into the ground and the widening of the gap between rich and poor.

They will vote Labour at the next election.

That was my first thoughts exactly. I don't know why there's not more response from the opposition when you consider the long term implications.

Well MaizieD Vintagenonna was talking about the House of Lords too excellent post I thought apt

From a friend of mine on FB

Today I watched an advert on my TV, and I felt like weeping. It wasn't for charitable donations to some third world country, that I have gladly given to throughout my 62 years, but for the Trussel Trust, a UK wide charity asking us to feed our home grown, and ever increasing starving ain folk. They run foodbanks throughout the UK . Please give just £5.00 to help feed hungry families they beg , this in a country abundant in wealthy Millionaire , Multimillionaire and Billionaire businesses.Foodbanks are no longer the go to of the unfortunates, but also of the nurse, the shop assistant, the cleaner, holding down three jobs etc etc . Has it come down to this, working people who can't earn enough to feed their children, being forced to beg , and abandoned by a government ,who have relinquished any responsibility . If we didnt give to foodbanks , would this greedy government be forced to , they have us over a barrel and they know it , the same goes when they show us ex servicemen with missing limbs . In Scotland we have the option to do things differently, independence would allow us to make our own choices, tied to this union, the fight against poverty can only be lost , as our elected government here in Holyrood , introduces measures to help make life easier for those in need , the Westminster government takes it back . I may or may not live long enough to see the benefits of independence, but on the day we get our referendum, I will be at that ballot box , and it will be a Yes from me , for my country , my children and grandchildren .

MaizieD

Vintagenonna

Could the House of Lords abolish Starmer? Could they abolish each other?

We might then be able to acquire a Labour Party leader who isn't singing from a 1980s Conservative Song-List (and getting both the audience and the tune wrong).

Accountable democracy in this country relies on having (at least) two parties each of whom can challenge the power of the other.

I thought Tony Bliar was a disaster for labour supporters. But Starmer hadn't emerged from the primordial slime at that point.

Gordon Brown is a light in the darkness,

Can I report posts for immediate deviation from the subject of the OP?

I know threads wander, but this is ludicrous.

We are talking about the most corrupt and destructive PM the UK has ever had and you want to moan about Starmer?

Well said, MaizieD

I don't understand how the first reaction of anyone who supports democracy, regardless of which party they support, can be to respond to this issue with whataboutery.

I am all for a second chamber however, it’s time for a rethink of how it’s made up, perhaps elected?

Surely once made a peer they can vote however they like?

I will reserve my judgement on the alleged new intake until such time as the appointments are made public.

Is there any way this can be undone after the appointments are made public?

We urgently need wholesale constitutional reform which should include abolition of the House of Lords.

What will it take for Kier Starmer to stop pandering to populism in the vain hope that we are all so desperate to see change that Labour will win a "landslide" based on a minority of votes just like the Tories did last time.?

Disgraceful! I hope the Queen will refuse Johnson's plan to pack the Lords with Tory hacks otherwise we are heading back to the bad old days when the hereditary peers from the backwoods stifled progress.

Surely once made a peer they can vote however they like?

I think you'll find, GG13, that the idea proposed is to give them further influential posts on public bodies once they are in the Lords. So the incentive to vote with the tories is reinforced by the promise of status and possibly extra income.

The plan also legitimises straightforward bribery. In a throwback to the Old Corruption that was a feature of 19th-century Tory Britain, compliant lords will be “rewarded” with lucrative special envoy positions,

I don't know how our constitution has come to accommodate these wildly undemocratic practices. I thought that House of Lords reform was meant to make the Lords more democratic, not open to overt corruption.

I am completely gobsmacked.

I wonder if the Queen is consulting her constitutional lawyers again (as she was rumoured to have done when it looked as though Johnson wasn't going to resign). It is she who formally assents to the new peerages. Can she decline to accept them?

It has been suggested on various occasions that Starmer might be deliberately biding his time.

Johnson's government had a large majority, so any genuine 'opposition' was almost impossible anyway.
Given that Johnson was almost bound to prove a failure, I can certainly see why Starmer might have thought it better to wait for Johnson to discredit himself and bring about his own highly predictable full from grace, and the ensuing damage within the Tory party, before really getting stuck in.

That has now happened, so the time has come for Starmer to swing into action. If he doesn't, he's clearly not cut out for the job.
Let's hope that he starts by really fighting for an overhaul of the House of Lords.

Come on, Starmer. Either step up now, or step down, because we desperately need someone who will fight to restore/preserve our country's democracy!

You are right - asecond chamber is important to balance the potential excesses of an over-powerful first chamber and it would be good to think about how it could be created and held in balance.

Thank you for your kind thoughts, MaizieD - and so sweetly expressed.

Wait, what?

Johnson packing the Lords with people who will vote they way they are told is Starmer's fault?

We're way through that looking glass, aren't we?

MaizieD

He shouldn't be nominating any peers at all. He is a disgraced PM. He was 'removed' because his parliamentary party couldn't stand his lying and corruption any longer (and, I suspect, because they say his approval rating with the public hit rock bottom). He has dishonoured the position of PM.

He is also under investigation by the Privileges Committee for lying to the House. If he is found to have done so and is suspended from Parliament (not literally, unfortunately) that will be further proof of his dishonouring of the post and that his judgement in the matter of nominations for peerage is not to be trusted in any way.

The proposals revealed in the article are just a further step in the destruction of our constitution and government accountability.

I am utterly ??? that this is even being proposed and that Johnson's advisor thinks it's achievable.

This is the key issue in my opinion. Until a ruling has been made by the parliamentary privileges committee he should not be empowered to make any recommendations. If he is found guilty, and is suspended from parliament there should be no honours awarded as result of his PMship.

Oldnproud, I am inclined to your way of thinking. I think KS would prefer a radical rethink of many Parliamentary and political practices which have outlived, if not their usefulness, the way that usefulness is delivered. Any minor tinkering with the House of Lords will do nothing to bring the H of P kicking and screaming into the 21st century and beyond. I would like to see KS, should he be elected with a sizeable majority, implement wholesale change from local politics right to the top. That takes deep thought and preparation and cannot be a 'knee-jerk, sticking plaster' solution to the BJ Peerage fiasco. It has to be done in a way that cannot be reversed with each new government at whim. It has to be an agreed policy across all parties as a viable way forward for democracy in modern times. I am sure KS will make his thoughts known on BJ's list when produced.
One of the greatest diseases of 21st Century Britain, imho, is impatience. Everything has to be done yesterday. Public impatience with implementing Brexit is what gave us an 80 Tory majority. The new PM for the next two years will still have that 80 majority and can do grave harm with it.

Grantanow

Disgraceful! I hope the Queen will refuse Johnson's plan to pack the Lords with Tory hacks otherwise we are heading back to the bad old days when the hereditary peers from the backwoods stifled progress.

The queen won't do anything she can only do what Johnson asks. So pointless and powerless.

We need an effective Head of State an elected elected president.

To be fair to the House of Lords, they’ve actually been holding the government to account over the past few years. Which is why, I suppose, Johnson is desperate to fill it with his supporters.