Hey there! Sign in to join this conversationNew here? Join for free
x Turn on thread page Beta

Tories enrage Labour with bid to save last hereditary peers in Lords watch

Announcements
    Offline

    18
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by GlamCanyon)
    Born with a sense of duty? What on earth are you talking about?
    Borns the wrong word. But certainly by the age of at least 5. They have it drilled into them
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Nick_000)
    Typical Tories. They all inherited wealth so its hardly surprising that they're fans of hereditary bonuses.
    The vast majority of Labour's cabinet were also of rich birth, and over half went to private/independent/public school - Blears, Harman, Balls, Hain, Darling, Jowell, Straw, Benn, Woodward, to name just the notable ones. What really is the difference? One side is a group of rich toffs looking out for themselves, the other is a group of toffs pretending to be working class, and pulling the wool over people's eyes with their we're-just-like-you rhetoric.
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by LivingMemory)
    The vast majority of Labour's cabinet were also of rich birth, and over half went to private/independent/public school - Blears, Harman, Balls, Hain, Darling, Jowell, Straw, Benn, Woodward, to name just the notable ones. What really is the difference? One side is a group of rich toffs looking out for themselves, the other is a group of toffs pretending to be working class, and pulling the wool over people's eyes with their we're-just-like-you rhetoric.
    Benn didnt go to private school
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by JNV)
    Benn didnt go to private school
    He went to Westminister.
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Don_Scott)
    He went to Westminister.
    Yes your right he went to a state secondary school.
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Ryan W)
    Unless I'm misunderstanding how this actually works, I can't see any benefit to having this monarchy-esque system in place. It's not like the current hereditary lords will be removed — they just won't be replaced, and instead voted-in lords will be put in place.

    Surely that's the way to go in a democratic society?

    No, they'll just be replaced by life peers and so on. Life peers aren't voted in, they're appointed by merit, ie Alan Sugar. And there's alot wrong with an elected second house - it would be a direct challenge to the Commons and possibly render it obsolete - constitutionally you can't have a direct challenge to the house of commons. It would be totally pointless.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by JNV)
    Yes your right he went to a state secondary school.
    Er, no. Westminister School is one of the most expensive independent schools in Britain and was one of the original nine public schools along with Eton.
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Don_Scott)
    Er, no. Westminister School is one of the most expensive independent schools in Britain and was one of the original nine public schools along with Eton.
    Yes but he attended a comprehensive school for his secondary education.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    I like them being there - I believe people with no political agenda, nor desire to scavenge votes, are most likely to vote for the right thing.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by JNV)
    Yes but he attended a comprehensive school for his secondary education.
    No, he didn't. He stayed at Westminister the whole time and then left for Oxford.

    He is the descendent of an aristocrat, not a "working class hero".
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by JNV)
    http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/new...cle6999919.ece
    Just goes to show that all Cameron’s claims about a new progressive Conservative party are just bull ****.
    This is old news, why don't you dig up some more dirt on a party you clearly hate.
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by JNV)
    Yes but he attended a comprehensive school for his secondary education.
    :rofl: Who on earth told you that? He had a more privileged upbringing than most of the conservative party.
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    You do both relise that he was talking about Hilary Benn not Tony.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    Personally, I think that hereditary peers are a great part of british history and should be kept. If you want, remove their right to vote in 'money bills' but keep them in there. It's something i feel passionate about even though i'd be the kind of 'poor immigrant' they'd look down upon if sterotypes are to be believed
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    Yeah, we need to kick out those who have been doing a good job, those who defeated the 48 day detention bill and would continue to protect our civil liberties. How else are we going to make room for some more reality TV stars to join Lord Sugar?
    Offline

    12
    ReputationRep:
    The tories don't object on a matter of principle. They object because having such a large number of unelected supporters in a position of some power is a major advantage to their own party.

    The tories would be stock against the idea if the hereditary peers all happened to have labour loyalty.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    Great, more celebrities and ex-flatmates of the Prime Minister. :rolleyes:
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    Fully support the hereditary peers in this case.
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by L i b)
    To lefties, 'progressive' just means 'left wing'. That's not how the rest of us see it. I think this is a very progressive measure, and all the old fashioned 1970s thinkers in the Labour Party just end up looking like fools with their ideological nonsense and willingness to destroy everything that is good and has served Britain well for centuries.
    I agree with you on this. The idea of "progress" is subjective, and for all it's worth I think that tradition such as this is worth keeping. I'm not so much a monarchist, but I definitely like the peer system, and by connection the concept of hereditary titles.

    Labour doesn't like the obstacles posed by the Lords, and hereditary peers are perhaps outside of its political grasp. I think the Tories are right to stand up for fair tradition

    The House of Lords is a necessary check on the powers of parliament... I don't think Lords should be elected, but instead appointed without fear or favour, independent of the government.
    Offline

    12
    ReputationRep:
    God, get rid of the hereditary peers and that should be all.
 
 
 
Reply
Submit reply
Turn on thread page Beta
TSR Support Team

We have a brilliant team of more than 60 Support Team members looking after discussions on The Student Room, helping to make it a fun, safe and useful place to hang out.

Updated: February 10, 2010
Poll
Do you like carrot cake?
Useful resources

Groups associated with this forum:

View associated groups

The Student Room, Get Revising and Marked by Teachers are trading names of The Student Room Group Ltd.

Register Number: 04666380 (England and Wales), VAT No. 806 8067 22 Registered Office: International House, Queens Road, Brighton, BN1 3XE

Write a reply...
Reply
Hide
Reputation gems: You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.