The Bishop
Labour
Down With Factionalism!
Posts: 38,889
|
Post by The Bishop on Jul 18, 2013 10:10:20 GMT
It was always intended to be only temporary - about 15 years is "temporary" enough for some of us.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 18, 2013 10:38:43 GMT
Utterly discredited system. squalid little compromise There's no place in Parliament for squalid little compromises. *innocent face* |
|
|
|
Post by Davıd Boothroyd on Jul 18, 2013 10:51:22 GMT
Utterly discredited system. squalid little compromise There's no place in Parliament for squalid little compromises. That one that was agreed on 11 May 2010 is among the worst. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 18, 2013 11:06:36 GMT
There's no place in Parliament for squalid little compromises. That one that was agreed on 11 May 2010 is among the worst. Aww, David Boothroyd doesn't like parties working together in the national interest. Bless. |
|
|
|
Post by Tangent on Jul 18, 2013 11:10:52 GMT
Utterly discredited system. squalid little compromise Our entire constitution is built on "squalid little compromises". They generally serve us well. |
|
|
|
Post by Davıd Boothroyd on Jul 18, 2013 11:20:30 GMT
"Parties working together" is surely more a hope than an analysis.
But that they are doing so "in the national interest" is a right corker.
|
|
|
|
Post by Davıd Boothroyd on Jul 18, 2013 11:34:20 GMT
I sometimes feel the Conservatives don't make enough of the massive coincidence that just when the world economy had its biggest postwar crisis, the British economy suffered as well.
The success of the Labour government in 2008 was to ensure that there was an economy for the present government to inherit. The Conservative opposition was happy to endorse its spending plans up to 2008 and had the Conservatives had their way the banks would have been even less regulated than they in fact were.
|
|
|
|
Post by johnloony on Jul 18, 2013 17:25:28 GMT
Utterly discredited system. squalid little compromise What would you prefer? First-Past-The-Post? You would have to toss a coin. |
|
Crimson King
Lib Dem
Be nice to each other and sing in tune
Posts: 9,842 
|
Post by Crimson King on Jul 18, 2013 17:54:15 GMT
very sensible, I'd agree with the age limit, but not on the restriction to ex politicians/obe, especially as plenty of ex politicians will get in in the unelected 1/4
I'd probably have a few fewer 'lords spiritual' and have some appointed from science, academia, the arts, industry with the proviso that they had never stood for public office or made a donation bigger than a certain size to a political party
|
|
|
|
Post by Devonian on Jul 20, 2013 22:26:22 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by Davıd Boothroyd on Apr 9, 2014 10:39:55 GMT
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 9, 2014 15:33:20 GMT
I know the present Lord Cromwell, Godfrey John Bewicke-Copley, is not closely related to Oliver and Thomas, but the news of the election sent my little Irish Catholic heart into a rapid beat.
|
|
neilm
Non-Aligned
Posts: 25,023
|
Post by neilm on Apr 11, 2014 9:56:47 GMT
This was a whole house by election? The 'excepted' in the first paragraph has confused me. |
|
|
|
Post by Davıd Boothroyd on Apr 11, 2014 12:12:39 GMT
This was a whole house by election? The 'excepted' in the first paragraph has confused me. No - Lord Moran held one of the places for Crossbench hereditary peers, so the electorate were the remaining 27 in that section and those among the 15 hereditary peers elected by the whole House who sat on the crossbench (2). |
|
|
|
Post by Devonian on Oct 21, 2014 20:48:10 GMT
|
|
maxque
Non-Aligned
Posts: 9,299
|
Post by maxque on Oct 22, 2014 2:01:20 GMT
Among notable candidates, there is the grandson of Harold Macmillan and the great-grandson of HH Asquith.
|
|
|
|
Post by greenchristian on Oct 22, 2014 15:34:58 GMT
Among notable candidates, there is the grandson of Harold Macmillan and the great-grandson of HH Asquith. Aren't they all descended from someone notable? |
|
|
|
Post by carlton43 on Oct 22, 2014 15:52:14 GMT
Thanks Devonian. Oh dear! What a motley crew? There are about three worth interviewing before the vote: The rest are either dotty or in need of medication. They are a very poor advertisement for the Hereditary Segment and deeply disappointing. |
|
|
|
Post by Devonian on Oct 22, 2014 16:11:29 GMT
The Earl of Oxford and Asquith was voted in with an absolute majority on the first count. This was some question over whether the 'Carter convention' that Peers elected by the whole house should be replaced by other peers of the same party. Evidently the convention held. The results were Oxford and Asquith, E. (Liberal Democrat) 155 Napier and Ettrick, L. (Crossbench) 35 Stockton, E. (Conservative) 31 Kennet, L. (Liberal Democrat) 29 Margadale, L. (Conservative) 13 Massereene and Ferrard, V. (L. Oriel) (Crossbench) 6 Somerleyton, L. (Crossbench) 6 Harlech, L. (Conservative) 4 Calverley, L. (Crossbench) 1 Layton, L. (Conservative) 1 Middleton, L. (Conservative) 1 Sudeley, L. (Conservative) 1 Biddulph, L. (Conservative) 0 Cadman, L. (Conservative) 0 Rowallan, L. (Conservative) 0 Total Votes 283 Votes needed to be elected 142 www.parliament.uk/documents/lords-finance-office/2013-14/Hereditary-Peers-by-election-result-Methuen.pdf |
|
neilm
Non-Aligned
Posts: 25,023
|
Post by neilm on Oct 22, 2014 16:43:17 GMT
Isn't Sudeley a bit dotty? Hangs out with some dubious South African/Rhodesian types?
|
|
