Johnson's Peerages

Dinahmo

Is there anyone at all out there who would like to defend Nadine Dorries' recent behaviour?

Her mother?

Is there anyone at all out there who would like to defend Nadine Dorries' recent behaviour?

Nadine Dorries, who apparently is on the list, one assumes for services rendered, but what services, I dread to think, has apparently tweeted an image of Sunak stabbing Johnson in the back.

I don't think that politics has ever reached such a low level before.

Good plan DaisyAnne.

MayBee70

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.

Exactly, MayBee.

I know I seem to be the only one in favour when this sort of thing comes up. I still think the HoC should be the English Parliament (housed in the middle of England). The HoL could then be the UK revising chamber it's meant to be and ensure bills for one country will work in harness over all the countries of the UK. An English Parliament would/should give each country a level of autonomy while the UK Senate/Supreme House or whatever would keep them together. Oh, and the UK HoP (no Lords, Ladies or similar) should be in the middle of the UK (York, I think ).

paddyann54 - re your friend's post on FB. During the last 18 months almost all the donations that I have made have been to UK charities - Trussell Trust, Sally Army, Centrepoint etc etc. I have always held the view that a country that was one of the top 6 wealthiest countries should be ensuring that its people didn't have to rely upon charities.

I think that it is appalling that we need to make up for the lack of money/benefits that the govt should be giving to the poorer/helpless in our society.

varian

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.?

I'm not sure that is what Starmer thinks varian. I got the impression he aims and believes it will be possible to get the most votes (possibly 50%) and then have a pact (not a coalition) with some of the smaller parties. They would then get the bills that are popular with all of them through. I hope this is true as that should enable PR.

Or perhaps that is what you meant and don't want?

Sadly, I think Johnson has learned many of his lessons from the US Presidential system. Even more sadly, he doesn't seem to realise we have a totally different system.

Isn't the idea of stuffing the Lords to do with changes to the laws on Northern Ireland? I suppose he thinks he needs that so he can go on thinking himself Mr Brexit. After all, without that, what is he?

mokryna

Have a second house that is voted in on proportional representation every 7 years.
Each political party can then chose their own people, on a list of those who have been registered present the longest, from either in the House of Lords or House of Commons.

That sounds like a good idea. It might also then pave the way for a sensible PR system for the Commons.

Have a second house that is voted in on proportional representation every 7 years.
Each political party can then chose their own people, on a list of those who have been registered present the longest, from either in the House of Lords or House of Commons.

You couldn't make this up!

"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."

One for the scrapbook.

You couldn't make this up!!!

"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."

One for the family scrapbook.

A good thought, MayBee70.

Something to reflect on, rather than rant on.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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?

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.

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!

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?

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.

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.?

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

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.