B890 - House of Lords Reform Bill 2015 Watch

This discussion is closed.
Birchington
Badges: 20
Rep:
?
#1
Report Thread starter 3 years ago
#1
B890 - House of Lords Reform Bill 2015, TSR Government

House of Lords Reform Bill 2015
An act to rename the House of Lords and reform the method by which individuals are made members thereof, and for connected purposes

BE IT ENACTED by the Queen's most excellent Majesty, in accordance with the provisions of the Parliament Acts 1911 and 1949, and by the authority of the same, as follows:-

1: Definitions
(1) 'The House of Lords' shall refer to the Right Honourable the Lords Spiritual and Temporal of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland in Parliament Assembled.

2: Details
1. Name, titles and size:

(1) The House of Lords shall consist of 194 members.
(2) Each member shall bear the title 'Lord' and shall be styled 'the Right Honourable'.

2.Elections
(1) The members of the House of Lords shall be elected by the Saint-Lague method.
(2) For the purposes of electing members of the House of Regions the United Kingdom shall be divided into regions corresponding to the NUTS-1 statistical divisions. These are shown in this map:-


(3) Half of the elected members of the House of Lords shall be elected every 5 years, starting 6 months after Royal Assent is given to this Act.
(4) The proportion of seats that each electoral region is entitled to shall be adjusted according to its population. Regions shall be placed into categories for this purpose as follows :
a. The four most populous regions shall collectively be entitled to 78seats, to be divided among them equally.
b. The four next most populous regions shall collectively be entitled to 68 ats, to be divided among them equally.
c. The four least populous regions shall collectively be entitled to 58 seats, to be divided among them equally.
(5) Candidates for election must not have been employed by a Member of Parliament or a political party, have donated a total sum of greater than £200 to a political party, or been on the board of directors of a company which has donated a total sum of greater than £500 to a political party in the preceding 10 years.

3. Terms, removals and procedure in the event of resignation or death
(1) Each member of the House of Lords shall serve for one term of 10 years. This shall be non-renewable.
(2) Members of the House of Lords may be removed by the Sovereign or, in the absence of a Sovereign, the serving Head of State. This power must be exercised if a member of the House of Lords is convicted of a criminal offence.
(3) Members of the House of Lords may resign by sending a formal letter to the Sovereign or, in the absence of a Sovereign, the serving Head of State informing them of their intent to resign, and by making a public announcement of their intent to resign.
(4) Should an elected member of the House of Lords resign; be removed or die, their party shall appoint a replacement.

3: Commencement, Short Title and Extent
(1) This Act may be cited as the House of Lords (Reform) Act 2015.
(2) This Act shall extend to the United Kingdom; and
(3) shall come into force immediately after Royal Assent.
0
cranbrook_aspie
Badges: 19
Rep:
?
#2
Report 3 years ago
#2
AYE!
0
That Bearded Man
Badges: 22
Rep:
?
#3
Report 3 years ago
#3
Super

Posted from TSR Mobile
1
PetrosAC
  • Political Ambassador
Badges: 20
Rep:
?
#4
Report 3 years ago
#4
Aye of course


Posted from TSR Mobile
1
Saracen's Fez
  • Community Assistant
Badges: 20
Rep:
?
#5
Report 3 years ago
#5
Aye!
1
James Milibanter
  • Political Ambassador
Badges: 17
Rep:
?
#6
Report 3 years ago
#6
An Aye for and Aye
0
Jammy Duel
  • Political Ambassador
Badges: 21
Rep:
?
#7
Report 3 years ago
#7
This again
You know my stance
**** off

If it ain't broke, don't fix it

Posted from TSR Mobile
1
cranbrook_aspie
Badges: 19
Rep:
?
#8
Report 3 years ago
#8
(Original post by Jammy Duel)
This again
You know my stance
**** off

If it ain't broke, don't fix it

Posted from TSR Mobile
My stance too, but unfortunately it is broke.
0
username456717
Badges: 19
Rep:
?
#9
Report 3 years ago
#9
Absolutely not.

We don't need another elected chamber.
cranbrook_aspie
Badges: 19
Rep:
?
#10
Report 3 years ago
#10
(Original post by nebelbon)
Absolutely not.

We don't need another elected chamber.
Why not? Right now, someone can obtain the right to have a vote and a say on legislation that affects normal people's everyday lives just by cosying up to the Prime Minister and doing the right things at the right time, without ever having to face the force of public opinion. Doesn't that scare you?
0
Jammy Duel
  • Political Ambassador
Badges: 21
Rep:
?
#11
Report 3 years ago
#11
(Original post by cranbrook_aspie)
My stance too, but unfortunately it is broke.
I haven't looked in detail, but the image implies elections, which is not a fix

Posted from TSR Mobile
0
emiloujess
Badges: 19
Rep:
?
#12
Report 3 years ago
#12
Aye
0
Wellzi
Badges: 16
Rep:
?
#13
Report 3 years ago
#13
Who keeps pushing this cr*p.

NAY
0
username456717
Badges: 19
Rep:
?
#14
Report 3 years ago
#14
(Original post by cranbrook_aspie)
Why not? Right now, someone can obtain the right to have a vote and a say on legislation that affects normal people's everyday lives just by cosying up to the Prime Minister and doing the right things at the right time, without ever having to face the force of public opinion. Doesn't that scare you?
No it doesn't.

As we've seen recently the Lords can hold the government to account if they try and pass damaging things - tax credits - or they can introduce things, using their wide variety of knowledge (16 yo votes in the EU ref) which an elected HoC didn't do.

It provides a balance to the main chamber, it won't always be the case but it will never be outrageously biased in one manner.

Also, even though the election method is slightly different, the HoL will reflect the make-up of the HoC much more than it does now - so what's the point of having a second one?
cranbrook_aspie
Badges: 19
Rep:
?
#15
Report 3 years ago
#15
(Original post by Wellzi)
Who keeps pushing this cr*p.

NAY
Me, as Secretary of State for Constitutional Reform, and presenting a modified version of a bill on an issue about which I feel strongly which was defeated once in a different parliament with a different makeup isn't 'keeping pushing this crap', thank you very much. It's called 'fixing mistakes and trying again in different circumstances'.
0
cranbrook_aspie
Badges: 19
Rep:
?
#16
Report 3 years ago
#16
(Original post by nebelbon)
No it doesn't.

As we've seen recently the Lords can hold the government to account if they try and pass damaging things - tax credits - or they can introduce things, using their wide variety of knowledge (16 yo votes in the EU ref) which an elected HoC didn't do.

It provides a balance to the main chamber, it won't always be the case but it will never be outrageously biased in one manner.

Also, even though the election method is slightly different, the HoL will reflect the make-up of the HoC much more than it does now - so what's the point of having a second one?
Who gave them a mandate to hold the elected government to account? It certainly wasn't the people who have to live with their decisions. And this bill makes it more likely that there will be a wide variety of knowledge, as those who have spent their entire life in politics/tried to buy a seat would be prevented from standing for election.

The HoL overall makeup will always be very different to that of the HoC, due to the fact that members will be elected in halves at a different time to the HoC elections.
0
tengentoppa
Badges: 14
Rep:
?
#17
Report 3 years ago
#17
The House of Lords provides measured expertise and is an excellent counterweight to the populist and rushed measures we often see in the Commons. Introducing elections would put an end to this?

Even supposing removing such an effective upper chamber wasn't a dreadful idea:

1. Why the massive fall in the number of Lords? Why that particular number
2. Why is there a random reference to a "House of Regions" in 2(2)?
3. How do you expect to hold elections without party affiliation? How would we get any kind of meaningful campaign?
4. The HL currently comprises inter alia former generals, trades union leaders, academics and judges. By removing them and instating people in a shambolic popularity contest how are you going to retain the same esoteric expertise?
5. How can elected representatives who rely on popular support be expected to provide non-partisan and non-populist scrutiny?

It's an ill-thought out bill which would greatly weaken the effectiveness of the upper chamber and the legislative procedure as a whole. Nay.
0
cranbrook_aspie
Badges: 19
Rep:
?
#18
Report 3 years ago
#18
(Original post by tengentoppa)
The House of Lords provides measured expertise and is an excellent counterweight to the populist and rushed measures we often see in the Commons. Introducing elections would put an end to this?

Even supposing removing such an effective upper chamber wasn't a dreadful idea:

1. Why the massive fall in the number of Lords? Why that particular number
2. Why is there a random reference to a "House of Regions" in 2(2)?
3. How do you expect to hold elections without party affiliation? How would we get any kind of meaningful campaign?
4. The HL currently comprises inter alia former generals, trades union leaders, academics and judges. By removing them and instating people in a shambolic popularity contest how are you going to retain the same esoteric expertise?
5. How can elected representatives who rely on popular support be expected to provide non-partisan and non-populist scrutiny?

It's an ill-thought out bill which would greatly weaken the effectiveness of the upper chamber and the legislative procedure as a whole. Nay.
The 'measured expertise' would stay and would in fact be increased with this bill, as people who have spent their entire lives as an MP and people who happen to have given excessive amounts to political parties, who almost certainly do not have 'measured expertise', would no longer be able to be appointed as peers.

1. Because 800 is far, far too many. We need a small house of accountable experts providing measured scrutiny to bills, not the bloated MPs' retirement home/party donor reward system with occasional knowledgeable individuals we have currently. It was originally going to be 200 but we brought it down to 194 because the maths worked better that way.
2. Because it was originally going to be named that but then we decided to keep the House of Lords name - that particular House of Regions reference must have escaped notice
3. We don't. Where did you get that from?
4. The House of Lords currently contains four categories of people: ex-MPs, party donors, hereditary snobs and people who can actually make a valuable contribution from professions such as the ones you mentioned. We're trying to remove the first three categories. The idea behind 2 (5) is that parties are forced to stand candidates who would be able to provide valuable expertise and scrutiny to legislation rather than just rewarding people with a Lords seat.
5. They serve for one term each and do not represent single-member constituencies, so they do not rely on popular support.
0
Jammy Duel
  • Political Ambassador
Badges: 21
Rep:
?
#19
Report 3 years ago
#19
We should correct the current methods of appointment to be better rather than disolve the current value by making it elected and filling it with people no better than the commons. If you really want to do this disolve the lords and expand the commons; oh, yeah, the structure and size of out country is not one for which a single chamber works well.

P.S. They generally only work well in small chambers that only really have one broad class.

Posted from TSR Mobile
0
Wellzi
Badges: 16
Rep:
?
#20
Report 3 years ago
#20
(Original post by cranbrook_aspie)
Me, as Secretary of State for Constitutional Reform, and presenting a modified version of a bill on an issue about which I feel strongly which was defeated once in a different parliament with a different makeup isn't 'keeping pushing this crap', thank you very much. It's called 'fixing mistakes and trying again in different circumstances'.
I'm surprised you can't see the positives of the Lords, especially with the real life example from a few weeks ago of the Lords being compassionate.
0
X
new posts
Latest
My Feed

See more of what you like on
The Student Room

You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

Personalise

Where do you need more help?

Which Uni should I go to? (114)
17.48%
How successful will I become if I take my planned subjects? (69)
10.58%
How happy will I be if I take this career? (113)
17.33%
How do I achieve my dream Uni placement? (97)
14.88%
What should I study to achieve my dream career? (63)
9.66%
How can I be the best version of myself? (196)
30.06%

Watched Threads

View All