FabSwingers.com > Forums > Politics > Labour Party Reforms
Labour Party Reforms
Jump to: Newest in thread
 |
By (user no longer on site) OP
over a year ago
|
I don’t know if many have seen this, but it seems labour a looking at creating a democratically elected upper chamber to replace the house of lords.
Also they are looking devolving government to local regions and moving civil servants out of London to local areas to help them better understand regional needs.
Also included was a British Bank which would help support technological innovation in the UK, and reforms to training.
The question is this. Do we need these reforms? or is it better to maintain the current system? |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"I don’t know if many have seen this, but it seems labour a looking at creating a democratically elected upper chamber to replace the house of lords.
Also they are looking devolving government to local regions and moving civil servants out of London to local areas to help them better understand regional needs.
Also included was a British Bank which would help support technological innovation in the UK, and reforms to training.
The question is this. Do we need these reforms? or is it better to maintain the current system?"
The undemocratic house of Lords definitely needs reforming.. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site) OP
over a year ago
|
"I don’t know if many have seen this, but it seems labour a looking at creating a democratically elected upper chamber to replace the house of lords.
Also they are looking devolving government to local regions and moving civil servants out of London to local areas to help them better understand regional needs.
Also included was a British Bank which would help support technological innovation in the UK, and reforms to training.
The question is this. Do we need these reforms? or is it better to maintain the current system?
The undemocratic house of Lords definitely needs reforming.."
How many people really want that though? |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site) OP
over a year ago
|
"
How many people really want that though?
A poll published in the Daily Express two days ago said 84% want it abolished"
Yet people still support the conservative party who wants to maintain it. Doesn’t make sense right?
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site) OP
over a year ago
|
"Brexit didn't make sense and people still voted for it"
They did, but is root and branch reform of the system needed now? Would this help with day to day problems ordinary people are facing?
Big question is it going to provide value for money? |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site) OP
over a year ago
|
"Will it be a vote winner for SKS though?"
I don’t know, how many people want to see the lords reformed, how many people want regional devolvement, and how many people want changes to the system at the moment.
Is labour reforming our government going to improve peoples lives, that is what I am thinking.
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *irldnCouple
over a year ago
Brighton |
SKS should have the balls to support PR. That will reform politics in this country more than anything else.
An elected upper chamber makes sense too.
There also needs to be a huge focus on preventing cronyism. MP salaries should be increased but then forbidden from taking second jobs.
The Speaker should have the power (and exercise it) to make ministers answer the question they are asked in the Commons not give an answer to the question they wished they were asked. It is a farce and undermines all credibility.
The Ministerial Code needs tightening up and be legally enforced with ramifications for breaking it.
We need a written and codified constitution.
Fixed term parliaments! |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"I don’t know if many have seen this, but it seems labour a looking at creating a democratically elected upper chamber to replace the house of lords.
Also they are looking devolving government to local regions and moving civil servants out of London to local areas to help them better understand regional needs.
Also included was a British Bank which would help support technological innovation in the UK, and reforms to training.
The question is this. Do we need these reforms? or is it better to maintain the current system?"
Was the House of Lords part of the feudal system. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"Will it be a vote winner for SKS though?"
Hahaha
I'd sooner rub raw freshly cut scotch bonnets on my bum hole than vote for that treacherous, establishment implemented rat.. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *estivalMan
over a year ago
borehamwood |
"SKS should have the balls to support PR. That will reform politics in this country more than anything else.
An elected upper chamber makes sense too.
There also needs to be a huge focus on preventing cronyism. MP salaries should be increased but then forbidden from taking second jobs.
The Speaker should have the power (and exercise it) to make ministers answer the question they are asked in the Commons not give an answer to the question they wished they were asked. It is a farce and undermines all credibility.
The Ministerial Code needs tightening up and be legally enforced with ramifications for breaking it.
We need a written and codified constitution.
Fixed term parliaments!"
lol and you really think either of the main two party would do anything that would hurt there chances of getting a majority, it may be what you want to happen but neither labour or the torys would implement most of that |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
Starmer is showing his desperation by pulling out the old Labour trick of promising the Universe to tempt voters to put him in No 10 at the next election.
I trust him just about as far as I could comfotably throw him.
After all, remember all the pledges he made when running for the leadership?
Broken every single one of them |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *irldnCouple
over a year ago
Brighton |
"SKS should have the balls to support PR. That will reform politics in this country more than anything else.
An elected upper chamber makes sense too.
There also needs to be a huge focus on preventing cronyism. MP salaries should be increased but then forbidden from taking second jobs.
The Speaker should have the power (and exercise it) to make ministers answer the question they are asked in the Commons not give an answer to the question they wished they were asked. It is a farce and undermines all credibility.
The Ministerial Code needs tightening up and be legally enforced with ramifications for breaking it.
We need a written and codified constitution.
Fixed term parliaments! lol and you really think either of the main two party would do anything that would hurt there chances of getting a majority, it may be what you want to happen but neither labour or the torys would implement most of that"
No I don’t think they will but I said they “should have the balls” |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
I'd be more happy if the HoL was less politicised but meritocracy. Eg a lord is appointed by a cross party committee as being an expert in a needed area. As one drops off a new lord is appointed. In whatver area is now needed.
No party affiliations. No PM appointments
if it has to be directly elected it needs to be different to HoC otherwise what's the point ? |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *asyukMan
over a year ago
West London |
"I'd be more happy if the HoL was less politicised but meritocracy. Eg a lord is appointed by a cross party committee as being an expert in a needed area. As one drops off a new lord is appointed. In whatver area is now needed.
No party affiliations. No PM appointments
if it has to be directly elected it needs to be different to HoC otherwise what's the point ? "
I'm very much with you on this.
Why, exactly, do we need another group of people with exactly the same motivations and party political in-fights?
I bet you that most people wanting a "democratically elected upper house" have no idea what it's for.
We already have a building full of people jockeying for political power and controlled by the need to be popular for re-election so pleasing the press and whatever the latest opinion poll says. There are also more and more MPs with little experience outside of politics.
The Upper House is supposed to be a revising chamber which should be full of wisdom. The "village elders" of our country with deep expertise and experience of everything from law to engineering to biochemistry to poetry to trade unionism to land owning.
Their job is to send back stupid or unworkable bits of legislation created for political expediency for reconsideration.
The current selection process is, indeed, pants and politicised. A truly independent chamber selected on expertise has a use and ultimately cannot overrule the elected body.
An elected Upper House with the same motivation and knowledge as the Lower House adds nothing useful and leads to confusion as to who makes the decisions.
What do those wanting an elected Upper House expect it to do? |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *asyukMan
over a year ago
West London |
"I don’t know if many have seen this, but it seems labour a looking at creating a democratically elected upper chamber to replace the house of lords.
Also they are looking devolving government to local regions and moving civil servants out of London to local areas to help them better understand regional needs.
Also included was a British Bank which would help support technological innovation in the UK, and reforms to training.
The question is this. Do we need these reforms? or is it better to maintain the current system?"
Elected upper house is pointless. More of what we have plus confusion as to who's in charge.
Regional government to what end? Another layer of bureaucracy with further fighting for resource?
British Bank, perhaps useful but depends what it funds and who decides? How is it different to current grant funding? |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *eroy1000Man
over a year ago
milton keynes |
"I don’t know if many have seen this, but it seems labour a looking at creating a democratically elected upper chamber to replace the house of lords.
Also they are looking devolving government to local regions and moving civil servants out of London to local areas to help them better understand regional needs.
Also included was a British Bank which would help support technological innovation in the UK, and reforms to training.
The question is this. Do we need these reforms? or is it better to maintain the current system?"
Yes seen some of it. Changing the Lord's for an elected house is popular. I think reducing the amount of them would also be good. I assume it would be us the public that elect them and not just MP's. Shame he has not also included PR to be introduced but maybe one day. If they do go to an elected upper house then lets hope the are better than the elected commons |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
Don't think it will ever happen. The Labour Party has talked about ever since they formed but nothing has ever happened. I remember Harrold Wilson talking about it. Use it to win votes then forget about or say there is some legal issues. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *ugehandsMan
over a year ago
Fife/ Newcastle |
The house of Lords does have an important function in regards to legislation and there are some very knowledgeable people within the house, however sadly the house has become bloated with insignificant no names.
There does need to be changes but replacing one set of hangers on for another set doesnt make sense.
As far as devolved powers go, labour only need to look at the SNP administration in Scotland for proof that devolution doesn't work. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site) OP
over a year ago
|
Sounds like an idea that will never be implemented properly, there is too much resistance, as much as people don’t like the way people are appointed to the HoL.
Would we end up with an American system?, where there would be deadlock between the houses meaning nothing gets sorted.
The biggest problem is this, small government makes it impossible to govern, big government makes its impossible to govern.
What about they tighten up their system? Actually have the ability to enforce their code, make it easier to get rid of MP’s and PM’s if they commit bad behaviour, labour have put forward citizen juries or something, which might get through. But obviously many don’t mind the HoL, but the people who get in shouldn’t be putting cronies in their to whatever person is in power.
I don’t know, but the one thing is that MP’s and Lords should face the consequences of their behaviour easier and for MP’s this should lead to them losing their seat and a by-election is automatically being triggered. Lords should be stripped of their titles and there should be a non partisan commission which chooses Lords as opposed to the government of the Day.
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"Also they are looking devolving government to local regions and moving civil servants out of London to local areas to help them better understand regional needs."
Wasn't moving some of government to the north and devolving to give local areas more say something the Boris Johnson government put forward? |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site) OP
over a year ago
|
"Also they are looking devolving government to local regions and moving civil servants out of London to local areas to help them better understand regional needs.
Wasn't moving some of government to the north and devolving to give local areas more say something the Boris Johnson government put forward?"
Yes!, has it worked though? |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *asyukMan
over a year ago
West London |
"I don’t know if many have seen this, but it seems labour a looking at creating a democratically elected upper chamber to replace the house of lords.
Also they are looking devolving government to local regions and moving civil servants out of London to local areas to help them better understand regional needs.
Also included was a British Bank which would help support technological innovation in the UK, and reforms to training.
The question is this. Do we need these reforms? or is it better to maintain the current system?
Elected upper house is pointless. More of what we have plus confusion as to who's in charge.
Regional government to what end? Another layer of bureaucracy with further fighting for resource?
British Bank, perhaps useful but depends what it funds and who decides? How is it different to current grant funding?"
The Briefing Room on House of Lords reform
https://www.bbc.co.uk/sounds/play/m001fwj3?partner=uk.co.bbc&origin=share-mobile |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Wasn't moving some of government to the north and devolving to give local areas more say something the Boris Johnson government put forward?
Yeah, but Bojo probably meant North London.  "
Not correct, the Treasury now has offices in Darlington.
A Conservative policy. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
» Add a new message to this topic
