Hereditary Peers actually makes a lot more sense. They as has been stated are not bound by a party and can make educated judgments, rather than pop idol decisions.
Yes, but allowing them to be appointed by the government of the day, means that the lords is stuffed with the governments cronies, the hereditary's did a fantastic job compared to those who do it now, plus they arn't bound by any party.
I think that the House of Lords should be 100%appointed. Thats the middle ground between getting a seat by election or birthright. And it allows it to keep some of it's traditions. Also it would be too confusing and a little pointless having two elected houses
They represent the people far better than the commons does, the House of Lords has now become packed full of Tony's Cronies (as I like to call them). Niel Kinnock, a Lord. They are also the best atendees in the lords.
These men and women preserve the traditions in this country and unlike most Life Peers, they are not bound to any political party.
Are you being ironic? Was there not something called the Enlightenment and social revolutions 220 years ago? Today this debate about the Lords is ludicrous full stop.
Anything apart from a legislative in accordance with the direct democratic principle that is to say a fully elected second chamber would have even been frowned upon by Thomas Paine more than 200 years ago.
Let's stop this nonsense and give the power back to the people!
Hereditary Peers are brilliant men/women who work just as hard a life peer and they are raised on politics, these men/women work hard for there seat and love this nation!
In the House, a female peer would still be called, "My Noble Lord Lady so-and-so...."
Outside the House, a female baron of Parliament would be called Lady or Baroness.
GeorgeKnighton 2 years ago
A baroness is called lady or baroness
lanetxgp1 3 years ago
How are people supposed to call a female "lord", I know it's baron and baroness then does it become lord and lordless?
siobelaup 3 years ago
Hereditary Peers actually makes a lot more sense. They as has been stated are not bound by a party and can make educated judgments, rather than pop idol decisions.
ots2ots 3 years ago
Yes, but allowing them to be appointed by the government of the day, means that the lords is stuffed with the governments cronies, the hereditary's did a fantastic job compared to those who do it now, plus they arn't bound by any party.
Ohyewildthong 3 years ago
I think that the House of Lords should be 100%appointed. Thats the middle ground between getting a seat by election or birthright. And it allows it to keep some of it's traditions. Also it would be too confusing and a little pointless having two elected houses
4142375867985295 3 years ago
They represent the people far better than the commons does, the House of Lords has now become packed full of Tony's Cronies (as I like to call them). Niel Kinnock, a Lord. They are also the best atendees in the lords.
These men and women preserve the traditions in this country and unlike most Life Peers, they are not bound to any political party.
Ohyewildthong 3 years ago
U r so rational. How can I be like u & Thomas Pain???
Mebbe if we give the pwr to the ppl like u say, they will do real good things. Thx!! Fight the Power!
drhanyang 3 years ago
Are you being ironic? Was there not something called the Enlightenment and social revolutions 220 years ago? Today this debate about the Lords is ludicrous full stop.
Anything apart from a legislative in accordance with the direct democratic principle that is to say a fully elected second chamber would have even been frowned upon by Thomas Paine more than 200 years ago.
Let's stop this nonsense and give the power back to the people!
RationalEmotive 3 years ago
Hereditary Peers are brilliant men/women who work just as hard a life peer and they are raised on politics, these men/women work hard for there seat and love this nation!
Ohyewildthong 3 years ago