There should be more hereditary peers. Life peers just politicize things and take away the independent nature of the House of Lords. The Lords is there to look at a bill in an unbiased, non-partisan way and make it better; therefore, it must always exist.
I believe in having the Lords but having perhaps a few lesser of them and freeing up seats for specialists. So there are constant specialists whom are called in during a debate on agriculture (oh wait the agricultural powers have been devolved to the European Parliament) but for an example, they will give their opinions and scrutinies the legislation before hand. So instead of granting them peerage they are special scruteneers.
What's this applause all about? Who are these twats, Americans? I thought in the Lords they just said 'hear, hear!' when they agreed, and shook their heads and primed their tobacco pipes when they didn't?
Citizens complain about "politicians out of touch with the people" and "elected thieves"--how is several hundred more of the same kind in a separate House the solution?
LESSON FOR TODAY: Beware when a proposal strikes you as very simple, instantly "understood" and immediately has you clamoring for it, too. (Re-examine the LibDems' demand for proportional representation, vis-a-vis the problems it is supposed to solve.)
The opposing team were bringing up 'points of information' whenever they disagreed with him or had something to argue against him. He can decide whether or not to accept their points and the 'no thank yous' were when he was dismissing them. :]
this was a debate, and the guy was not necessarily defending his own views. This was part of a competition. Do you really think the members of the House of Lords are that young?
ps. democracy is not as obviously good as you may think it to be. Reading most basic political books show the inconsistencies and flaws of applying democracy within a social background.
That's why the US has a) an appointed cabinet b) senators appointed by governors if they need to be replaced and c) a massive problem with the amount of money needed to be elected. Very democratic.
And there's no elite in US politics of course, dear me no....
@PrincessLally I believe some foreigners would gladly have a teenager like susskind run their country, I for instance would advice the Italians to do so ^^
It's called a "point of information" where someone stands with a partcular gesture to ask for clarification, such as:
"Does the Right Honourable gentleman not feel that...and why?"
Many people were trying to get a Point of Information but as is expected from grear parliamentary debates 2 to 3 questions are only addressed and the rest are dismissed.
a showpiece rather than a discussion. catchy but immature- do u really think that the house, being the main means of POLITICAL control over the commons, should consist of doctors, "professors of immunology", etc.?! this is why we have democracy- because letting unelected people be in power is dangerous. experts are to provide advice, EXPERTise, not to make decisions
But the Lords is intended to be a revising chamber, not one that exerts political "control" over the Commons. If you feel this is necessary, then you need to change the rules far more radically - by writing a constitution, equalizing Lords/Commons powers as in the US or by some other device. Simply insisting on a second elected chamber with fewer powers will not do.
well, the house of lords was originally to create legislation like the house of commons, but recently, because of it being unelected, it had powers removed.
I still agree though that the lords should be full of experts revising the commons laws which were passed by the people, and then sending it back if they don't like it and give reasons.
The problem though is that that system could lead to corruption, unless the house of commons, or the queen or someone has the power to remove lords.
Comment removed
haberdasherswater 2 months ago
i go to that school lol. im in year 7. our english teacher showed us and i thought i might check it out:)
frickinfiredancefall 1 year ago
There should be more hereditary peers. Life peers just politicize things and take away the independent nature of the House of Lords. The Lords is there to look at a bill in an unbiased, non-partisan way and make it better; therefore, it must always exist.
singsingsing22 1 year ago
I believe in having the Lords but having perhaps a few lesser of them and freeing up seats for specialists. So there are constant specialists whom are called in during a debate on agriculture (oh wait the agricultural powers have been devolved to the European Parliament) but for an example, they will give their opinions and scrutinies the legislation before hand. So instead of granting them peerage they are special scruteneers.
alex471996 1 year ago
woah the silence of this shocked having watched pmqs
twgoldwood 1 year ago
very bright chap there
HMservant 2 years ago 5
What an articulate young man!
What sophomoric arguments!
HKLivingston 2 years ago
lol - the praise of the banking system would not bode well today...
Catz007 2 years ago 2
What's this applause all about? Who are these twats, Americans? I thought in the Lords they just said 'hear, hear!' when they agreed, and shook their heads and primed their tobacco pipes when they didn't?
baresolid 2 years ago
Comment removed
gagothesith 2 years ago
The applause surprised me, too ... until it became clear who were on the benches.
gagothesith 2 years ago
Comment removed
baresolid 2 years ago
he was probably told he was argueing that side of the argument.
mbb05jb 2 years ago
Wow... three months ago I wanted an elected Chamber... what a silly little man I once was.
baresolid 2 years ago 2
BARESOLID
> I wanted an elected Chamber
Citizens complain about "politicians out of touch with the people" and "elected thieves"--how is several hundred more of the same kind in a separate House the solution?
LESSON FOR TODAY: Beware when a proposal strikes you as very simple, instantly "understood" and immediately has you clamoring for it, too. (Re-examine the LibDems' demand for proportional representation, vis-a-vis the problems it is supposed to solve.)
gagothesith 2 years ago
Correct.
baresolid 2 years ago
Not that you're jumping to conclusions about what kind of guy he is, of course...
It is a *debating* competition.
MjoEm32 2 years ago
well he deserves alot of props. he is speaking to a full house. confidence!
arrongosnelluk 3 years ago
Why is he saying no thank you?
famdude88 3 years ago
The opposing team were bringing up 'points of information' whenever they disagreed with him or had something to argue against him. He can decide whether or not to accept their points and the 'no thank yous' were when he was dismissing them. :]
mqnwbevrctxuzi 2 years ago
yes ladies and gentlemen, thank you ladies and gentlemen
growtallernow 3 years ago
"No thank you!" awesome!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
alonelychild 3 years ago
Brilliant. I hope he gets the Question time job. Pure common sense.
PedroBolton 3 years ago
PEDROBOLTON
> I hope he gets the Question time job.
To which job would you be referring?
gagothesith 2 years ago
Great, the British elite doing what they do best- protecting each other.
It irritates me to see anyone debate over democracy. Screw the House of Lords. Democracy can't be compromised.
militaryeisenhower 3 years ago
And there isn't an elite in american politics?
mbb05jb 3 years ago 5
this was a debate, and the guy was not necessarily defending his own views. This was part of a competition. Do you really think the members of the House of Lords are that young?
ps. democracy is not as obviously good as you may think it to be. Reading most basic political books show the inconsistencies and flaws of applying democracy within a social background.
Catz007 3 years ago
That's why the US has a) an appointed cabinet b) senators appointed by governors if they need to be replaced and c) a massive problem with the amount of money needed to be elected. Very democratic.
And there's no elite in US politics of course, dear me no....
MjoEm32 2 years ago
i hope foreigners watching this don't think our country's run by teenagers
PrincessLally 4 years ago 8
hahahahaha
mbb05jb 4 years ago
well, if these were the teenagers I would be more than comfort to be a british citizen. So well prepared, so ... young
alonelychild 3 years ago 2
@PrincessLally I believe some foreigners would gladly have a teenager like susskind run their country, I for instance would advice the Italians to do so ^^
JazzTrumpetNL 1 year ago
1.50, he slapped that bitch!
mbb05jb 4 years ago
What's she trying to do?
quantiseduniverse 3 years ago
interupt him. i think they can allow people to interupt them if they want.
mbb05jb 3 years ago
It's called giving way.
Allowing an interruption.
CallCal 3 years ago
It's called a "point of information" where someone stands with a partcular gesture to ask for clarification, such as:
"Does the Right Honourable gentleman not feel that...and why?"
Many people were trying to get a Point of Information but as is expected from grear parliamentary debates 2 to 3 questions are only addressed and the rest are dismissed.
Catz007 3 years ago
aint Brussels mainly run by brits; or a British way of thikin?
comedianaccount99 4 years ago
a showpiece rather than a discussion. catchy but immature- do u really think that the house, being the main means of POLITICAL control over the commons, should consist of doctors, "professors of immunology", etc.?! this is why we have democracy- because letting unelected people be in power is dangerous. experts are to provide advice, EXPERTise, not to make decisions
bartwasiak 4 years ago
But the Lords is intended to be a revising chamber, not one that exerts political "control" over the Commons. If you feel this is necessary, then you need to change the rules far more radically - by writing a constitution, equalizing Lords/Commons powers as in the US or by some other device. Simply insisting on a second elected chamber with fewer powers will not do.
MjoEm32 4 years ago 5
well, the house of lords was originally to create legislation like the house of commons, but recently, because of it being unelected, it had powers removed.
I still agree though that the lords should be full of experts revising the commons laws which were passed by the people, and then sending it back if they don't like it and give reasons.
The problem though is that that system could lead to corruption, unless the house of commons, or the queen or someone has the power to remove lords.
ManlySlut 3 years ago
pah ha
cuteykitten3 4 years ago
why are they all so young, anyone?
bmicky 4 years ago
it was a schools competition
lomby 4 years ago 2
who won this debate?
hellomlw 4 years ago
clever jamie.. i followed about half of it and then gave up.. i'm sure it made sense though xx
heatherlevy 4 years ago
nice one jamie
hellomlw 4 years ago