Why we need to scrap the House of Lords

[@lotus6560]

Agree, the Lords look after their own interests. I suspect if we had the right sort of governance in the upper chamber we could eliminate the networks for police commissioners, political mayors,quangos, northern powerhouses etc etc

[@fastfreddy19641]

The upper house should be qualified and elected directly.

[@FatRonaldo1]

If they are elected would it be a role for life? And if wasn’t, how would it be different from the commons?

[@fastfreddy19641]

@@FatRonaldo1 great question. It would be a third elected every three years. They would have to be qualified. And do the job of second check, also is it constitutional.

[@b19gow76]

Having an undemocratic house means that they don't have to worry about re-election meaning they can have unpopular motions in the short term but benfiatal in the long term

[@greyghost4448]

For what reason do you need an upper house anyway? Is one elected body not enough to represent the will of the people? The Nordic countries, New Zealand, South Korea and the Baltics can do very fine with just one chamber of parliament.

[@fastfreddy19641]

@@greyghost4448 good point. Just a second check that everything is constitutional really.

[@j.p.9423]

I don't see this changing very soon. Britain is too conservative as a nation. It doesn't believe in modernisation.

[@RepublicCampaign]

Not really the voters that are to blame on this one, a big majority of people want the Lords replaced.

[@adrianrouse5148]

The house of Lords should be abolished. And a house of Representatives established. People qualified and voted by the people to safeguard there interests. In law making

[@awkwardsean5141]

Graham for president!

[@hayttom]

I'm a committed Republic member (AND DONOR) but I just don't grasp why we need any upper house.

[@RepublicCampaign]

Hi Tom. It's possible to not have one, but the point made in the video is that by its nature the lower house has a majority that will almost always support the government. An upper house provides a check and balance on the power of the government and a more independent parliamentary house that can amend and challenge legislation.

[@nikkijubilant]

@@RepublicCampaign I am a Canadian. I wonder if the Canadian Senate is an approximate equivalent. House of Lords sounds medieval and antiquated. Many of us do not want to be a constitutional monarchy here in Canada either.

[@tvmediabiggestweaponusedon3256]

A lot of them have got away with some serious crimes over the years and still to this day it carries on, the whole place is a sest pit, people being protected from prosecution by the network that has surrounded the establishment for years.

[@tommouse464]

Wouldn't it be good if we ACTUALLY had a democracy

[@gturbitt]

Long Long over due...

[@telx4u]

Scrap the Lords.

[@peroquetoiseau933]

Yess your talking my language

[@brycerieper9606]

The Australian senate uses a proportional system where each state elects the 6 most popular candidates, that's why it's diverse and why the ballot paper can be a couple of feet long. If the UK were to make this new house apportioned by country, then the smaller countries might feel less alienated by the central government. Something like 3 English seats to 4 Celtic ones

[@greekre]

dude you need to do something about your audio, happy to contribute to a go fund me, if need be

[@steveburn8125]

I detest that argument of “expertise” funny how their “expertise” is always in OWNING lots of land OWNING banks insurance companies etc etc. Where is the expertise in actuality DOING something, where are the carers? The shop workers, The engineers, the kind of jobs that real people have mmmmm. They need to go now

[@tillycat3062]

SCRAP IT👍😩🏴󠁧󠁢󠁥󠁮󠁧󠁿🏴󠁧󠁢󠁥󠁮󠁧󠁿❤️

[@johngriffin-cv3ug]

I am a believer in bicameral government, but believe that the upper chamber, whatever it's going to be called, should be elected. This means fixed term parliaments.

[@oddity4650]

One major issues with parliament is it has to many stubborn rich, stupid, corrupted, old politicians, so important things like abolishing the royals is harder vs if we have a fairer government.

[@matthewdevereux1288]

Why do they wear such pompous silly gowns in the House of Lords? It reminds me of matriculation at Oxford - pretentious and dumb. @RuthDavidsonPC

[@RobinKoenig1917]

Personally, I think that a "upper house of nations" might work for a hypothetical Republic of Britain, perhaps modeled on the Bundesrat in Germany

[@unpoldq3117]

As a German I would have to say that the "Bundesrat" as a model to be copied is not well suited for Britain, because it would just not work. In the Bundesrat the governments of our 16 states may vote almost direktly on legislation (with each government having between 3 and 6 votes to be cast en bloc). If britain would become a federation, I would asume the federated entitities will be the 4 constituing countries (England, Scotland, Wales, and Northern Ireland) and England having around 5/6 of the Population that would make the upper house either extremly Imbalanced against England or the English Government would completly dominate the upper House (by being able to pass/veto bills on its own). Copying the Austrian "Bundesrat" (delagates elected by the state Parlaments who may vote freely, and are not bound to instrutions like their german counterparts) would be better, because this could work (at least if the election is not winner-take-all).

[@kenlandon6130]

Push out the hereditary members.

[@radioactivedetective6876]

"Fulk of expertise that you wont find in the Commons" - wow! That is so elitist! Even the names "Commons" and "Lords" reek elitism

[@aescubed]

I mean if separation of the executive and legislature is the goal, then the US at least theoretically, has things in place with a hard separation of powers.

[@tomweldon7608]

Does this site have a Twitter account, great channel

[@paullacey2999]

Half the old codgers dont know what day it is..

[@radioactivedetective6876]

Why is the Church part of parliament?

[@mirabeaux851]

8 years???? I think it might be better to split the difference and maybe do 3 years and 6 or 5 for an upper house. Having a non-nat’l leader politician there for a time that’s closer to a decade is pushing it. And I wouldn’t be keen to copy Australia right away. They no longer need bicameralism and they copied us in the US. If you’re going to plan to introduce bicameralism, one that would be representatives from each consistency country would be better for the federation that the UK would likely become. However, one shouldn’t be thrown in if those places don’t feel that they want it. And don’t do what US States do, where we just have politicians in each house from basically the same districts. Make it meaningful and be *very careful* with how ‘perfect’ you want your bicameralism to be.

[@iemjgf]

We live in 21st century democracy with part of our governing body still based upon a feudal system.First and foremost, the Lords are unelected. Second, they are from a certain class of people, unrepresentative of ordinary people. There are at least 805 of them all drawing over £300 a day attendance allowance plus expenses etc. They can turn up, have a kip and then go and have their fill in a subsidised restaurant. Most of them are very rich people. In contrast our state pension was ranked 23rd from 28 in the EU. We invented food banks and nappy banks The latter for a child poverty state that grows , year by year. The Commons have promised on several occasions to abolish the Lords but you will notice, it is still there and thriving. Why, because those so-called elected representatives of the people are not going to give up one of their perks. So much for caring for their constituents. I am radical in my thoughts but over a period of years I could save the UK billions. First, abolish the Lords, second, cut the numbers to 250 in an overloaded Commons, with expenses to be strictly regulated including large fines for cheats. Third, and now I am in trouble, only pay the Queen an allowance from the government purse. She looks after her large parasite family, who are mainly multi- millionaires. The Duchy of Lancaster brings in over £20 million per annum. With these changes we would be nearing a true democracy. Let us not forget MP’s are REPRESENTATIVES of the people. They are our employees, not our bosses.

[@judgedottaylor7565]

If you care go to the website and volunteer 💪

[@greyghost4448]

What would happen with the lower British nobility, the earls, viscounts and barons, if Great Britain becomes a republic? Would their estates be seized?

[@BritishRepublicsn]

-yes- if I got to decide, I'd raise property taxes on their lands so they struggle to pay for it and eventually get evicted

[@BritishRepublicsn]

@@jlord9638 just tax them out of their land

[@zdtfdfhgjk]

Yeah, since the house of commons is so great...

[@miketallowin3300]

Madamepimpernel

[@matthewdevereux1288]

Why on earth does Prince Harry get a Pulitzer prize winner to ghostwrite a book for Random House when half our best writers are in the JobCentre Plus or in menial jobs? Where is the justice in this awful society?

[@redstar7292]

I agree in principle, but it surprised me but they did vote down the cuts to disabled benefits...

[@matthewdevereux1288]

Why on earth does Prince Harry get a $20 million book deal on top of a $100 million Netflix deal? What fresh hell from a Hieronymous Bosch triptych is this? @penguinrandom @netflix @devereuxmatthew