Hampshire MPs to rebel over reformation of House of Lords (From Daily Echo)
When news happens, text SDE and your photos or videos to 80360. Or contact us by email and phone.
Hampshire MPs to rebel over reformation of House of Lords
11:06am Tuesday 10th July 2012 in Politics
By Tom Moseley, Parliamentary Correspondent
SEVERAL Hampshire MPs are gearing up to defy the Government’s bid to transform the House of Lords.
Rebel Tories are prepared to vote against the reforms today in one of the biggest tests of the Conservative/Liberal Democrat coalition since it was formed two years ago.
MPs will vote today on the timetable for the Lords Reform Bill. The Government wants to limit debate to ten days, while rebels, and Labour, are pressing for no limit, which would jeopardise its chances of ever becoming law.
Julian Lewis, Tory MP for New Forest East, launched a furious attack on the Lib Dems, accusing the party of trying to keep hold of power by pushing for an elected House of Lords.
He said: “They will be able to blackmail any government for any concessions they want. This is not about democracy, it’s about cementing a permanent Lib Dem stranglehold on the democratic process.”
Yesterday a letter signed by more than 70 Tory MPs was sent around Parliament, saying the reforms threaten to “pile a constitutional crisis on top of an economic crisis”.
Among them were Dr Lewis, Winchester MP Steve Brine, Gosport MP Caroline Dinenage and Andrew Turner, the Tory MP for Isle of Wight.
If all of the signatories oppose tonight’s crunch vote on the timetable for the Bill, which restricts detailed debate to ten days, it is set to lead to the Government’s first significant defeat.
However, Romsey and Southampton North MP Caroline Nokes said she would be voting in favour of the reforms as they were a manifesto commitment.
But she was concerned about handing elected peers a 15-year mandate.
She said: “I believe to have legitimacy, the 15-year term is too long, especially when you look at the terms of other elected officials.”
Leading Lib Dem Chris Huhne told the Daily Echo that if Conservative MPs quashed the Lords changes, there would be “consequences” for other reforms – including the controversial redrawing of electoral boundaries.
Mr Huhne, the former Cabinet Minister who negotiated the relevant part of the coalition agreement for the Lib Dems, told the Daily Echo that reforming the Lords was “an integral part” of the agreement between the two parties.
He said: “I know that all of it was very carefully put together, and it was a very balanced package.”
The Government had to pass Lords Reform, he said, adding: “If we do not then there are bound to be consequences.
“I would suspect that if Lords reform doesn’t go through, we would have to look again at the whole section on political reform.”
Comments(47)
Shoong
says...
11:28am Tue 10 Jul 12
Tricky one for the coalition government, cheese off the Lib Dems or your own party.
What we don't want is a situation where the Commons and the house of Lords are competing with each other.
These are important constitutional matter and should not be taken lightly, you may as well abolish the House of Lords if you are going to go down this route.
Linesman
says...
11:36am Tue 10 Jul 12
Shoong wrote:It is nice to be able to agree with Shoong.
Elections for the House of Lords only cheapens it and a 15 year term is far too long for any term anywhere.
Tricky one for the coalition government, cheese off the Lib Dems or your own party.
What we don't want is a situation where the Commons and the house of Lords are competing with each other.
These are important constitutional matter and should not be taken lightly, you may as well abolish the House of Lords if you are going to go down this route.
The current system may not be perfect, but this proposal does nothing to improve the situation.
If this election for the Upper House were conducted at a time when one particular party were riding high in the opinion polls, it could well mean that for 15 years they would hold sway over Parliament when another party has been elected.
Perhaps the answer would be to disenfrachise members of the House of Lords who are non-resident in the UK and also those who have not attended to vote for X number of years.
southy
says...
12:08pm Tue 10 Jul 12
Linesman wrote:Yes 15 years is way to long, but its better than the present system where its a life time to hold sway over the House of Commons, and they are not voted in to office by the public.
Shoong wrote:It is nice to be able to agree with Shoong.
Elections for the House of Lords only cheapens it and a 15 year term is far too long for any term anywhere.
Tricky one for the coalition government, cheese off the Lib Dems or your own party.
What we don't want is a situation where the Commons and the house of Lords are competing with each other.
These are important constitutional matter and should not be taken lightly, you may as well abolish the House of Lords if you are going to go down this route.
The current system may not be perfect, but this proposal does nothing to improve the situation.
If this election for the Upper House were conducted at a time when one particular party were riding high in the opinion polls, it could well mean that for 15 years they would hold sway over Parliament when another party has been elected.
Perhaps the answer would be to disenfrachise members of the House of Lords who are non-resident in the UK and also those who have not attended to vote for X number of years.
The House of Lords should be abolish, and turned into a House of Proportional Representation (and I mean the whole House and not a %)
A Southampton resident
says...
12:26pm Tue 10 Jul 12
I would suggest electing people on 5 year terms who are deliberately not aligned to political parties but who have acquired life-experience and are able to rise above petty party concerns for the greater good.
Linesman
says...
12:51pm Tue 10 Jul 12
A Southampton resident wrote:Give an example of who you have in mind.
Perhaps this is an opportunity to remove politics entirely from an elected Second Chamber. After all, running the country is too important a task to be left to politicians.
I would suggest electing people on 5 year terms who are deliberately not aligned to political parties but who have acquired life-experience and are able to rise above petty party concerns for the greater good.
ohec
says...
1:09pm Tue 10 Jul 12
Shoong
says...
1:30pm Tue 10 Jul 12
ohec wrote:'anything has got to be better'? Any suggestions then?
I don't understand how you can cheapen a house of lords that has criminals amongst its members not to mention religious buffoons,and when they do turn up they can't stay awake. An elected house of no more than 150 that are elected on a five year basis with limited powers. Anything has got to be better than the present system of fools who haven't got a clue how most of the population live.
Be careful what you wish for!
southy
says...
2:12pm Tue 10 Jul 12
ohec wrote:Thats how they became Lords even the Royal Family have that in common they are all gangsters.
I don't understand how you can cheapen a house of lords that has criminals amongst its members not to mention religious buffoons,and when they do turn up they can't stay awake. An elected house of no more than 150 that are elected on a five year basis with limited powers. Anything has got to be better than the present system of fools who haven't got a clue how most of the population live.
Remind me of the Mafia and how they got power
Linesman
says...
2:18pm Tue 10 Jul 12
ohec wrote:We have one elected house already.
I don't understand how you can cheapen a house of lords that has criminals amongst its members not to mention religious buffoons,and when they do turn up they can't stay awake. An elected house of no more than 150 that are elected on a five year basis with limited powers. Anything has got to be better than the present system of fools who haven't got a clue how most of the population live.
Do you Really want another like that?
Shoong
says...
2:29pm Tue 10 Jul 12
southy wrote:Oh dear, here we go...
ohec wrote:Thats how they became Lords even the Royal Family have that in common they are all gangsters.
I don't understand how you can cheapen a house of lords that has criminals amongst its members not to mention religious buffoons,and when they do turn up they can't stay awake. An elected house of no more than 150 that are elected on a five year basis with limited powers. Anything has got to be better than the present system of fools who haven't got a clue how most of the population live.
Remind me of the Mafia and how they got power
Georgem
says...
2:39pm Tue 10 Jul 12
Shoong wrote:Tin foil hats on standby, Comrade.
southy wrote:Oh dear, here we go...
ohec wrote:Thats how they became Lords even the Royal Family have that in common they are all gangsters.
I don't understand how you can cheapen a house of lords that has criminals amongst its members not to mention religious buffoons,and when they do turn up they can't stay awake. An elected house of no more than 150 that are elected on a five year basis with limited powers. Anything has got to be better than the present system of fools who haven't got a clue how most of the population live.
Remind me of the Mafia and how they got power
Paramjit Bahia
says...
2:49pm Tue 10 Jul 12
Unfortunately over the years the working people's party while ditching most other principles on which it was created, has also changed its attitude on this issue.
Now they have found red benches comfortable for resting the back sides of their dis functional leading lights (Read parasites of Labour and Trade Union Movement) like Kinnock and Prescott etc, where instead of being sent to some knackered's yard they can keep on doing mischiefs on behalf of their buddies in big business; while claiming thousands in allowances.
Tory Blair promised to improve this undemocratic ancient traditional expensive and undemocratic institution but like on most other issues not only failed to deliver goods but also turned House of Clowns into dog's dinner. Complete mess; removed some of the old wood but filled the place with donors and side kicks.
Milliband and Sadiq Khan etc should stop sitting on the fence, if they have even a drop of real Labour blood left in them, then they should be honouring original Labour idea and demanding that House of Clowns should be abolished. But that will jeopardise their own chances of dressing like clowns, won't it?
Shoong
says...
2:55pm Tue 10 Jul 12
Paramjit Bahia wrote:For many years The House of Lords has been kind of a buffer between the Commons and the Constitution, without looking into it I'm sure they have blocked some laws that would have you screaming & frothing blood from the hills.
Labour's original policy was to completely remove House of Lords, which was mostly dumping ground for by products of over indulgence in sexual activities by prominent powerful thugs, often with glorified whores who were not their wives.
Unfortunately over the years the working people's party while ditching most other principles on which it was created, has also changed its attitude on this issue.
Now they have found red benches comfortable for resting the back sides of their dis functional leading lights (Read parasites of Labour and Trade Union Movement) like Kinnock and Prescott etc, where instead of being sent to some knackered's yard they can keep on doing mischiefs on behalf of their buddies in big business; while claiming thousands in allowances.
Tory Blair promised to improve this undemocratic ancient traditional expensive and undemocratic institution but like on most other issues not only failed to deliver goods but also turned House of Clowns into dog's dinner. Complete mess; removed some of the old wood but filled the place with donors and side kicks.
Milliband and Sadiq Khan etc should stop sitting on the fence, if they have even a drop of real Labour blood left in them, then they should be honouring original Labour idea and demanding that House of Clowns should be abolished. But that will jeopardise their own chances of dressing like clowns, won't it?
'Labour's original policy was to completely remove House of Lords, which was mostly dumping ground for by products of over indulgence in sexual activities by prominent powerful thugs, often with glorified whores who were not their wives.'
You do know where babies come from don't you? To call The house of Lords a bunch of b*stards is perhaps something we have all done from time to time but to actually accuse them of being b*stards is going a bit far.
As you seem to hate everything about this country, maybe it's time to think about pastures new.
What about India? Because there's no corruption there is there..?
ohec
says...
3:01pm Tue 10 Jul 12
southy
says...
3:17pm Tue 10 Jul 12
Each County will have at lest 1 member in the PR House, the county with the smallest populution would be your base line, to each county that can double that base line gets another member in the PR House, and treble get the third one ect ect
To keep things in order have a 3 person (with no votes), bar of 1 Religous for the moral side of things, 1 some type of lawer to make sure no other law is being double up on or breaking another law, and 1 EA type person
southy
says...
3:22pm Tue 10 Jul 12
Georgem wrote:There is no difference between how the Mafia made there money and gain power, than how your Royal Family and Lords got there power and money, just that Mafia done it a lot quicker and was not so greedy.
Shoong wrote:Tin foil hats on standby, Comrade.
southy wrote:Oh dear, here we go...
ohec wrote:Thats how they became Lords even the Royal Family have that in common they are all gangsters.
I don't understand how you can cheapen a house of lords that has criminals amongst its members not to mention religious buffoons,and when they do turn up they can't stay awake. An elected house of no more than 150 that are elected on a five year basis with limited powers. Anything has got to be better than the present system of fools who haven't got a clue how most of the population live.
Remind me of the Mafia and how they got power
Shoong
says...
3:24pm Tue 10 Jul 12
southy wrote:Whatever, just stick to the subject pls.
Georgem wrote:There is no difference between how the Mafia made there money and gain power, than how your Royal Family and Lords got there power and money, just that Mafia done it a lot quicker and was not so greedy.
Shoong wrote:Tin foil hats on standby, Comrade.
southy wrote:Oh dear, here we go...
ohec wrote:Thats how they became Lords even the Royal Family have that in common they are all gangsters.
I don't understand how you can cheapen a house of lords that has criminals amongst its members not to mention religious buffoons,and when they do turn up they can't stay awake. An elected house of no more than 150 that are elected on a five year basis with limited powers. Anything has got to be better than the present system of fools who haven't got a clue how most of the population live.
Remind me of the Mafia and how they got power
Georgem
says...
3:27pm Tue 10 Jul 12
southy wrote:There's a world of difference, southy. The Mafia has to launder their wealth, for one thing.
Georgem wrote:There is no difference between how the Mafia made there money and gain power, than how your Royal Family and Lords got there power and money, just that Mafia done it a lot quicker and was not so greedy.
Shoong wrote:Tin foil hats on standby, Comrade.
southy wrote:Oh dear, here we go...
ohec wrote:Thats how they became Lords even the Royal Family have that in common they are all gangsters.
I don't understand how you can cheapen a house of lords that has criminals amongst its members not to mention religious buffoons,and when they do turn up they can't stay awake. An elected house of no more than 150 that are elected on a five year basis with limited powers. Anything has got to be better than the present system of fools who haven't got a clue how most of the population live.
Remind me of the Mafia and how they got power
BillyTheKid_
says...
3:27pm Tue 10 Jul 12
southy
says...
3:29pm Tue 10 Jul 12
Georgem wrote:So did your Lords and Royals, don't think they are any different because they are not
southy wrote:There's a world of difference, southy. The Mafia has to launder their wealth, for one thing.
Georgem wrote:There is no difference between how the Mafia made there money and gain power, than how your Royal Family and Lords got there power and money, just that Mafia done it a lot quicker and was not so greedy.
Shoong wrote:Tin foil hats on standby, Comrade.
southy wrote:Oh dear, here we go...
ohec wrote:Thats how they became Lords even the Royal Family have that in common they are all gangsters.
I don't understand how you can cheapen a house of lords that has criminals amongst its members not to mention religious buffoons,and when they do turn up they can't stay awake. An elected house of no more than 150 that are elected on a five year basis with limited powers. Anything has got to be better than the present system of fools who haven't got a clue how most of the population live.
Remind me of the Mafia and how they got power
Georgem
says...
3:36pm Tue 10 Jul 12
southy wrote:*Sigh* give up, old bean. Oh, wait, I'm not allowed to say that now, in case your white knight on his steed comes to your rescue! Sorry, Billy, please don't berate me again! I'll wither under your, err, I'm not sure what to call it.
Georgem wrote:So did your Lords and Royals, don't think they are any different because they are not
southy wrote:There's a world of difference, southy. The Mafia has to launder their wealth, for one thing.
Georgem wrote:There is no difference between how the Mafia made there money and gain power, than how your Royal Family and Lords got there power and money, just that Mafia done it a lot quicker and was not so greedy.
Shoong wrote:Tin foil hats on standby, Comrade.
southy wrote:Oh dear, here we go...
ohec wrote:Thats how they became Lords even the Royal Family have that in common they are all gangsters.
I don't understand how you can cheapen a house of lords that has criminals amongst its members not to mention religious buffoons,and when they do turn up they can't stay awake. An elected house of no more than 150 that are elected on a five year basis with limited powers. Anything has got to be better than the present system of fools who haven't got a clue how most of the population live.
Remind me of the Mafia and how they got power
Paramjit Bahia
says...
3:38pm Tue 10 Jul 12
southy wrote:Hi Comrade,
This is how you could do a House of PR, replacing the House of Lords.
Each County will have at lest 1 member in the PR House, the county with the smallest populution would be your base line, to each county that can double that base line gets another member in the PR House, and treble get the third one ect ect
To keep things in order have a 3 person (with no votes), bar of 1 Religous for the moral side of things, 1 some type of lawer to make sure no other law is being double up on or breaking another law, and 1 EA type person
What were you drinking lunch time? Was it holy water from Ganges one of the most polluted rivers?
Are you serious about safety of moral side of things in the hands of flat earth loonies or it was just meant to be bit of a joke?
southy
says...
4:01pm Tue 10 Jul 12
Paramjit Bahia wrote:No Parami its just covering those that believe in fairy tales, and like I said those three on the 3 man bar would have no votes, they would just give pointers but have no real say.
southy wrote:Hi Comrade,
This is how you could do a House of PR, replacing the House of Lords.
Each County will have at lest 1 member in the PR House, the county with the smallest populution would be your base line, to each county that can double that base line gets another member in the PR House, and treble get the third one ect ect
To keep things in order have a 3 person (with no votes), bar of 1 Religous for the moral side of things, 1 some type of lawer to make sure no other law is being double up on or breaking another law, and 1 EA type person
What were you drinking lunch time? Was it holy water from Ganges one of the most polluted rivers?
Are you serious about safety of moral side of things in the hands of flat earth loonies or it was just meant to be bit of a joke?
Shoong
says...
4:05pm Tue 10 Jul 12
southy wrote:So they'd be good for about FA then really.
Paramjit Bahia wrote:No Parami its just covering those that believe in fairy tales, and like I said those three on the 3 man bar would have no votes, they would just give pointers but have no real say.
southy wrote:Hi Comrade,
This is how you could do a House of PR, replacing the House of Lords.
Each County will have at lest 1 member in the PR House, the county with the smallest populution would be your base line, to each county that can double that base line gets another member in the PR House, and treble get the third one ect ect
To keep things in order have a 3 person (with no votes), bar of 1 Religous for the moral side of things, 1 some type of lawer to make sure no other law is being double up on or breaking another law, and 1 EA type person
What were you drinking lunch time? Was it holy water from Ganges one of the most polluted rivers?
Are you serious about safety of moral side of things in the hands of flat earth loonies or it was just meant to be bit of a joke?
What are you proposing, making up more Bureaucrats?
I think we have enough of them thank you very much, you may as well shut shop.
southy
says...
4:11pm Tue 10 Jul 12
Shoong wrote:are you aspriring your self to be just like the lords,
southy wrote:So they'd be good for about FA then really.
Paramjit Bahia wrote:No Parami its just covering those that believe in fairy tales, and like I said those three on the 3 man bar would have no votes, they would just give pointers but have no real say.
southy wrote:Hi Comrade,
This is how you could do a House of PR, replacing the House of Lords.
Each County will have at lest 1 member in the PR House, the county with the smallest populution would be your base line, to each county that can double that base line gets another member in the PR House, and treble get the third one ect ect
To keep things in order have a 3 person (with no votes), bar of 1 Religous for the moral side of things, 1 some type of lawer to make sure no other law is being double up on or breaking another law, and 1 EA type person
What were you drinking lunch time? Was it holy water from Ganges one of the most polluted rivers?
Are you serious about safety of moral side of things in the hands of flat earth loonies or it was just meant to be bit of a joke?
What are you proposing, making up more Bureaucrats?
I think we have enough of them thank you very much, you may as well shut shop.
and if you fully under stood what i said it would reduce the bureaucrats in the house of lords, but then i dont expect you really under stand how the house of lords works
Shoong
says...
4:31pm Tue 10 Jul 12
southy wrote:Of course, next to you, I know nothing. Ditch the superiority complex, it makes for a distinctively unlikeable personality and spoils anything that an superior intellect like yourself might contribute.
Shoong wrote:are you aspriring your self to be just like the lords,
southy wrote:So they'd be good for about FA then really.
Paramjit Bahia wrote:No Parami its just covering those that believe in fairy tales, and like I said those three on the 3 man bar would have no votes, they would just give pointers but have no real say.
southy wrote:Hi Comrade,
This is how you could do a House of PR, replacing the House of Lords.
Each County will have at lest 1 member in the PR House, the county with the smallest populution would be your base line, to each county that can double that base line gets another member in the PR House, and treble get the third one ect ect
To keep things in order have a 3 person (with no votes), bar of 1 Religous for the moral side of things, 1 some type of lawer to make sure no other law is being double up on or breaking another law, and 1 EA type person
What were you drinking lunch time? Was it holy water from Ganges one of the most polluted rivers?
Are you serious about safety of moral side of things in the hands of flat earth loonies or it was just meant to be bit of a joke?
What are you proposing, making up more Bureaucrats?
I think we have enough of them thank you very much, you may as well shut shop.
and if you fully under stood what i said it would reduce the bureaucrats in the house of lords, but then i dont expect you really under stand how the house of lords works
Shoong
says...
4:50pm Tue 10 Jul 12
There wasn't much point in the end as it would have been defeated, but let's hope we haven't heard the last of reform for The House of Lords, I'm definitely in favour of it as long as it does not conflict with the Commons (basically my first post).
southy
says...
5:25pm Tue 10 Jul 12
Shoong wrote:Then its time you done some learning and read up on, if your worried about the number of bureaucrats the house of lords would want to make you jump of a tall building, there are more bureaucrats in the house of lords than there is in the house of commons.
southy wrote:Of course, next to you, I know nothing. Ditch the superiority complex, it makes for a distinctively unlikeable personality and spoils anything that an superior intellect like yourself might contribute.
Shoong wrote:are you aspriring your self to be just like the lords,
southy wrote:So they'd be good for about FA then really.
Paramjit Bahia wrote:No Parami its just covering those that believe in fairy tales, and like I said those three on the 3 man bar would have no votes, they would just give pointers but have no real say.
southy wrote:Hi Comrade,
This is how you could do a House of PR, replacing the House of Lords.
Each County will have at lest 1 member in the PR House, the county with the smallest populution would be your base line, to each county that can double that base line gets another member in the PR House, and treble get the third one ect ect
To keep things in order have a 3 person (with no votes), bar of 1 Religous for the moral side of things, 1 some type of lawer to make sure no other law is being double up on or breaking another law, and 1 EA type person
What were you drinking lunch time? Was it holy water from Ganges one of the most polluted rivers?
Are you serious about safety of moral side of things in the hands of flat earth loonies or it was just meant to be bit of a joke?
What are you proposing, making up more Bureaucrats?
I think we have enough of them thank you very much, you may as well shut shop.
and if you fully under stood what i said it would reduce the bureaucrats in the house of lords, but then i dont expect you really under stand how the house of lords works
southy
says...
5:28pm Tue 10 Jul 12
Give it to the people to decide and not any MP or Lord to decide.
Georgem
says...
5:38pm Tue 10 Jul 12
southy wrote:Sadly, southy, you'll find a lot of people simply don't care. So the upshot of that will be, what happens is decided by yet another minority.
"“I would suspect that if Lords reform doesn’t go through, we would have to look again at the whole section on political reform.”"
Give it to the people to decide and not any MP or Lord to decide.
Not that I can think of any solution to that.
opera phantom
says...
9:44pm Tue 10 Jul 12
Messiah. What with him and Vince Cable keep throwing his toys out of his pram, I wish they would all just evaporate.
southy
says...
11:19pm Tue 10 Jul 12
southy
says...
11:21pm Tue 10 Jul 12
Shoong wrote:Not been drop at all, It has pass the first hurdle. no fix time limit so no MP can talk it out off time at a later date.
Breaking News, it's been dropped!
There wasn't much point in the end as it would have been defeated, but let's hope we haven't heard the last of reform for The House of Lords, I'm definitely in favour of it as long as it does not conflict with the Commons (basically my first post).
Poppy22
says...
11:55pm Tue 10 Jul 12
A Southampton resident wrote:I agree totally. Common sense at last.
Perhaps this is an opportunity to remove politics entirely from an elected Second Chamber. After all, running the country is too important a task to be left to politicians. I would suggest electing people on 5 year terms who are deliberately not aligned to political parties but who have acquired life-experience and are able to rise above petty party concerns for the greater good.
Political parties are just after power and position, and don't give a jot about the general public. Even our so-called "local" councillors are now so political that they're happy to let our few remaining countryside spaces be built on for the sake of the so-called need for housing directives coming down from their political leaders.
Politics is another "old boys" network that some women have managed to get into.
southy
says...
9:37am Wed 11 Jul 12
What got defeated was the Second reading, the second reading was about putting a time limit on the House of Lords Reform Bill, (if this got pass, it would mean that an member of the House of Commons could talk it out of time so it could not get a pass, and believe me the Torys are very good at talking a bill out of time the gas bags that they are they done it to often before).
What happens now is the House of Lords Reform Bill it will get as many debates on it as often it is needed, it could last now till the end of the term of Government and it could even pass onto the next Government, where again it could have the second reading come up again.
The Idea of the Second reading is to push some thing though fast to a stage of fail or succeed.
Georgem
says...
9:40am Wed 11 Jul 12
southy wrote:Presumably this
Shoong wrote:Not been drop at all, It has pass the first hurdle. no fix time limit so no MP can talk it out off time at a later date.
Breaking News, it's been dropped!
There wasn't much point in the end as it would have been defeated, but let's hope we haven't heard the last of reform for The House of Lords, I'm definitely in favour of it as long as it does not conflict with the Commons (basically my first post).
http://www.bbc.co.uk
/news/uk-politics-18
778639
is the work of more evil hackers trying to discredit you, then?
southy
says...
10:07am Wed 11 Jul 12
Georgem wrote:Another one who don't really under stand what is going on, read what I posted just above.
southy wrote:Presumably this
Shoong wrote:Not been drop at all, It has pass the first hurdle. no fix time limit so no MP can talk it out off time at a later date.
Breaking News, it's been dropped!
There wasn't much point in the end as it would have been defeated, but let's hope we haven't heard the last of reform for The House of Lords, I'm definitely in favour of it as long as it does not conflict with the Commons (basically my first post).
http://www.bbc.co.uk
/news/uk-politics-18
778639
is the work of more evil hackers trying to discredit you, then?
Its only the Second Reading that got defeated.
Not the reform bill of the House of Lords.
The Second reading is about putting a Time Limit on the Debates.
southy
says...
10:11am Wed 11 Jul 12
Dozens of Conservatives were expected to defy the government and oppose the plan to limit the time available for debating plans for proposed changes.
Shoong
says...
10:37am Wed 11 Jul 12
southy wrote:I suspect the superiority complex is a big hit with the ladies. Correct me if I'm wrong.
Shoong Let me dumb it down for you to explain what is going on, seeing your like many that don't really understand Economics and Political Policy, which is a shame because if a lot more did then many more would get involved and this country would not be in a mess that it is in now.
What got defeated was the Second reading, the second reading was about putting a time limit on the House of Lords Reform Bill, (if this got pass, it would mean that an member of the House of Commons could talk it out of time so it could not get a pass, and believe me the Torys are very good at talking a bill out of time the gas bags that they are they done it to often before).
What happens now is the House of Lords Reform Bill it will get as many debates on it as often it is needed, it could last now till the end of the term of Government and it could even pass onto the next Government, where again it could have the second reading come up again.
The Idea of the Second reading is to push some thing though fast to a stage of fail or succeed.
Georgem
says...
10:57am Wed 11 Jul 12
Shoong wrote:I'll translate that into 'southy' so he can understand it.
southy wrote:I suspect the superiority complex is a big hit with the ladies. Correct me if I'm wrong.
Shoong Let me dumb it down for you to explain what is going on, seeing your like many that don't really understand Economics and Political Policy, which is a shame because if a lot more did then many more would get involved and this country would not be in a mess that it is in now.
What got defeated was the Second reading, the second reading was about putting a time limit on the House of Lords Reform Bill, (if this got pass, it would mean that an member of the House of Commons could talk it out of time so it could not get a pass, and believe me the Torys are very good at talking a bill out of time the gas bags that they are they done it to often before).
What happens now is the House of Lords Reform Bill it will get as many debates on it as often it is needed, it could last now till the end of the term of Government and it could even pass onto the next Government, where again it could have the second reading come up again.
The Idea of the Second reading is to push some thing though fast to a stage of fail or succeed.
"Acxpect the superor complicats big hit with aldys. Nother one dont no what it going on. Correct if im rong. Thatcher dun it"
There. That's better.
southy
says...
11:31am Wed 11 Jul 12
Georgem wrote:Its not a case of superiority complex at all, its a case off you pushing forward your false Right Wing Propaganda Agenda and trying to keep things moving more and more to the right and not understanding a thing about it or what what will be achived and its right wingers that rely on people like you two who will keep right wing economic and political policy in power even low it not any good for the majority.
Shoong wrote:I'll translate that into 'southy' so he can understand it.
southy wrote:I suspect the superiority complex is a big hit with the ladies. Correct me if I'm wrong.
Shoong Let me dumb it down for you to explain what is going on, seeing your like many that don't really understand Economics and Political Policy, which is a shame because if a lot more did then many more would get involved and this country would not be in a mess that it is in now.
What got defeated was the Second reading, the second reading was about putting a time limit on the House of Lords Reform Bill, (if this got pass, it would mean that an member of the House of Commons could talk it out of time so it could not get a pass, and believe me the Torys are very good at talking a bill out of time the gas bags that they are they done it to often before).
What happens now is the House of Lords Reform Bill it will get as many debates on it as often it is needed, it could last now till the end of the term of Government and it could even pass onto the next Government, where again it could have the second reading come up again.
The Idea of the Second reading is to push some thing though fast to a stage of fail or succeed.
"Acxpect the superor complicats big hit with aldys. Nother one dont no what it going on. Correct if im rong. Thatcher dun it"
There. That's better.
Still it looks like you have read up a little and understand that you where wrong, even low you do not want to say that you was.
Shoong
says...
11:42am Wed 11 Jul 12
southy wrote:Nope, I don't do propaganda, it's got to the point where that's all you do yet you have the cheek to accuse others of it.
Georgem wrote:Its not a case of superiority complex at all, its a case off you pushing forward your false Right Wing Propaganda Agenda and trying to keep things moving more and more to the right and not understanding a thing about it or what what will be achived and its right wingers that rely on people like you two who will keep right wing economic and political policy in power even low it not any good for the majority.
Shoong wrote:I'll translate that into 'southy' so he can understand it.
southy wrote:I suspect the superiority complex is a big hit with the ladies. Correct me if I'm wrong.
Shoong Let me dumb it down for you to explain what is going on, seeing your like many that don't really understand Economics and Political Policy, which is a shame because if a lot more did then many more would get involved and this country would not be in a mess that it is in now.
What got defeated was the Second reading, the second reading was about putting a time limit on the House of Lords Reform Bill, (if this got pass, it would mean that an member of the House of Commons could talk it out of time so it could not get a pass, and believe me the Torys are very good at talking a bill out of time the gas bags that they are they done it to often before).
What happens now is the House of Lords Reform Bill it will get as many debates on it as often it is needed, it could last now till the end of the term of Government and it could even pass onto the next Government, where again it could have the second reading come up again.
The Idea of the Second reading is to push some thing though fast to a stage of fail or succeed.
"Acxpect the superor complicats big hit with aldys. Nother one dont no what it going on. Correct if im rong. Thatcher dun it"
There. That's better.
Still it looks like you have read up a little and understand that you where wrong, even low you do not want to say that you was.
Other people have different opinions - it's not propaganda - it's an opinion. As someone who wishes to be a Councillor and represent his local community, listening to people, no matter what political flavour, you would be charged with listening to them. But because you cannot accept that other people might have a differing opinion you dismiss it as 'propaganda'. It's all rather childish really.
That's why you will never represent anyone - you refuse to listen to anyone who doesn't share your opinion or political stance.
Drop the attitude with a large helping of a chip on the shoulder and someone might start taking you seriously.
southy
says...
11:54am Wed 11 Jul 12
Shoong wrote:Well then you did it with out even knowing that you did right wing propaganda.
southy wrote:Nope, I don't do propaganda, it's got to the point where that's all you do yet you have the cheek to accuse others of it.
Georgem wrote:Its not a case of superiority complex at all, its a case off you pushing forward your false Right Wing Propaganda Agenda and trying to keep things moving more and more to the right and not understanding a thing about it or what what will be achived and its right wingers that rely on people like you two who will keep right wing economic and political policy in power even low it not any good for the majority.
Shoong wrote:I'll translate that into 'southy' so he can understand it.
southy wrote:I suspect the superiority complex is a big hit with the ladies. Correct me if I'm wrong.
Shoong Let me dumb it down for you to explain what is going on, seeing your like many that don't really understand Economics and Political Policy, which is a shame because if a lot more did then many more would get involved and this country would not be in a mess that it is in now.
What got defeated was the Second reading, the second reading was about putting a time limit on the House of Lords Reform Bill, (if this got pass, it would mean that an member of the House of Commons could talk it out of time so it could not get a pass, and believe me the Torys are very good at talking a bill out of time the gas bags that they are they done it to often before).
What happens now is the House of Lords Reform Bill it will get as many debates on it as often it is needed, it could last now till the end of the term of Government and it could even pass onto the next Government, where again it could have the second reading come up again.
The Idea of the Second reading is to push some thing though fast to a stage of fail or succeed.
"Acxpect the superor complicats big hit with aldys. Nother one dont no what it going on. Correct if im rong. Thatcher dun it"
There. That's better.
Still it looks like you have read up a little and understand that you where wrong, even low you do not want to say that you was.
Other people have different opinions - it's not propaganda - it's an opinion. As someone who wishes to be a Councillor and represent his local community, listening to people, no matter what political flavour, you would be charged with listening to them. But because you cannot accept that other people might have a differing opinion you dismiss it as 'propaganda'. It's all rather childish really.
That's why you will never represent anyone - you refuse to listen to anyone who doesn't share your opinion or political stance.
Drop the attitude with a large helping of a chip on the shoulder and someone might start taking you seriously.
I don't have a chip at all, I don't need one, time will prove what i saying.
Shoong
says...
12:08pm Wed 11 Jul 12
southy wrote:I can't even understand that first sentence really.
Shoong wrote:Well then you did it with out even knowing that you did right wing propaganda.
southy wrote:Nope, I don't do propaganda, it's got to the point where that's all you do yet you have the cheek to accuse others of it.
Georgem wrote:Its not a case of superiority complex at all, its a case off you pushing forward your false Right Wing Propaganda Agenda and trying to keep things moving more and more to the right and not understanding a thing about it or what what will be achived and its right wingers that rely on people like you two who will keep right wing economic and political policy in power even low it not any good for the majority.
Shoong wrote:I'll translate that into 'southy' so he can understand it.
southy wrote:I suspect the superiority complex is a big hit with the ladies. Correct me if I'm wrong.
Shoong Let me dumb it down for you to explain what is going on, seeing your like many that don't really understand Economics and Political Policy, which is a shame because if a lot more did then many more would get involved and this country would not be in a mess that it is in now.
What got defeated was the Second reading, the second reading was about putting a time limit on the House of Lords Reform Bill, (if this got pass, it would mean that an member of the House of Commons could talk it out of time so it could not get a pass, and believe me the Torys are very good at talking a bill out of time the gas bags that they are they done it to often before).
What happens now is the House of Lords Reform Bill it will get as many debates on it as often it is needed, it could last now till the end of the term of Government and it could even pass onto the next Government, where again it could have the second reading come up again.
The Idea of the Second reading is to push some thing though fast to a stage of fail or succeed.
"Acxpect the superor complicats big hit with aldys. Nother one dont no what it going on. Correct if im rong. Thatcher dun it"
There. That's better.
Still it looks like you have read up a little and understand that you where wrong, even low you do not want to say that you was.
Other people have different opinions - it's not propaganda - it's an opinion. As someone who wishes to be a Councillor and represent his local community, listening to people, no matter what political flavour, you would be charged with listening to them. But because you cannot accept that other people might have a differing opinion you dismiss it as 'propaganda'. It's all rather childish really.
That's why you will never represent anyone - you refuse to listen to anyone who doesn't share your opinion or political stance.
Drop the attitude with a large helping of a chip on the shoulder and someone might start taking you seriously.
I don't have a chip at all, I don't need one, time will prove what i saying.
Don't get it do you? When I and others express an opinion, and here's a news flash - everybody's got one - it is not propaganda. It's an opinion. It might differ from yours - but that's all it is.
Even if I was to perpetrate propaganda I wouldn't do it on the DE site - I would take it to a medium where my propaganda might be effective!
I fear time may run out for you - you lack even the basic requirements to get people to listen to you, let alone agree with anything you are saying. A key basic pre-requisite skill a Councillor requires but you obviously lack. But then it wouldn't be about the people you might be elected to represent, no matter what the colour of the rosette - it would be all about YOU and your opinion and agenda.
The key word here is Reform - meaning to change something - which means looking to the future. However, you always look backward.
Reform - the key word here - is about change for the *future*. I don't care how it came about or how much you think they are gangsters - what's done is done. The future will give us an opportunity to change it - not dwell on the past.
Keep looking backward in anger and you'll get left behind. It's as simple as that.
Georgem
says...
1:36pm Wed 11 Jul 12
southy wrote:I see. So when someone disagrees with you, it is ALWAYS because of some right wing propaganda. Sorry, FALSE right wing propaganda. Because saying "false" before mentioning propaganda, every single time, is NOT propaganda, amirite?
Georgem wrote:Its not a case of superiority complex at all, its a case off you pushing forward your false Right Wing Propaganda Agenda and trying to keep things moving more and more to the right and not understanding a thing about it or what what will be achived and its right wingers that rely on people like you two who will keep right wing economic and political policy in power even low it not any good for the majority.
Shoong wrote:I'll translate that into 'southy' so he can understand it.
southy wrote:I suspect the superiority complex is a big hit with the ladies. Correct me if I'm wrong.
Shoong Let me dumb it down for you to explain what is going on, seeing your like many that don't really understand Economics and Political Policy, which is a shame because if a lot more did then many more would get involved and this country would not be in a mess that it is in now.
What got defeated was the Second reading, the second reading was about putting a time limit on the House of Lords Reform Bill, (if this got pass, it would mean that an member of the House of Commons could talk it out of time so it could not get a pass, and believe me the Torys are very good at talking a bill out of time the gas bags that they are they done it to often before).
What happens now is the House of Lords Reform Bill it will get as many debates on it as often it is needed, it could last now till the end of the term of Government and it could even pass onto the next Government, where again it could have the second reading come up again.
The Idea of the Second reading is to push some thing though fast to a stage of fail or succeed.
"Acxpect the superor complicats big hit with aldys. Nother one dont no what it going on. Correct if im rong. Thatcher dun it"
There. That's better.
Still it looks like you have read up a little and understand that you where wrong, even low you do not want to say that you was.
Georgem
says...
1:38pm Wed 11 Jul 12
southy wrote:You certainly do have a chip on your shoulder. Like Shoong says, you are singularly incapable of accepting that anybody can have an opinion other than your own. But you try to be a politician? Come off it.
Shoong wrote:Well then you did it with out even knowing that you did right wing propaganda.
southy wrote:Nope, I don't do propaganda, it's got to the point where that's all you do yet you have the cheek to accuse others of it.
Georgem wrote:Its not a case of superiority complex at all, its a case off you pushing forward your false Right Wing Propaganda Agenda and trying to keep things moving more and more to the right and not understanding a thing about it or what what will be achived and its right wingers that rely on people like you two who will keep right wing economic and political policy in power even low it not any good for the majority.
Shoong wrote:I'll translate that into 'southy' so he can understand it.
southy wrote:I suspect the superiority complex is a big hit with the ladies. Correct me if I'm wrong.
Shoong Let me dumb it down for you to explain what is going on, seeing your like many that don't really understand Economics and Political Policy, which is a shame because if a lot more did then many more would get involved and this country would not be in a mess that it is in now.
What got defeated was the Second reading, the second reading was about putting a time limit on the House of Lords Reform Bill, (if this got pass, it would mean that an member of the House of Commons could talk it out of time so it could not get a pass, and believe me the Torys are very good at talking a bill out of time the gas bags that they are they done it to often before).
What happens now is the House of Lords Reform Bill it will get as many debates on it as often it is needed, it could last now till the end of the term of Government and it could even pass onto the next Government, where again it could have the second reading come up again.
The Idea of the Second reading is to push some thing though fast to a stage of fail or succeed.
"Acxpect the superor complicats big hit with aldys. Nother one dont no what it going on. Correct if im rong. Thatcher dun it"
There. That's better.
Still it looks like you have read up a little and understand that you where wrong, even low you do not want to say that you was.
Other people have different opinions - it's not propaganda - it's an opinion. As someone who wishes to be a Councillor and represent his local community, listening to people, no matter what political flavour, you would be charged with listening to them. But because you cannot accept that other people might have a differing opinion you dismiss it as 'propaganda'. It's all rather childish really.
That's why you will never represent anyone - you refuse to listen to anyone who doesn't share your opinion or political stance.
Drop the attitude with a large helping of a chip on the shoulder and someone might start taking you seriously.
I don't have a chip at all, I don't need one, time will prove what i saying.
southy says...
11:20am Tue 10 Jul 12