Democracy in action

[darmstadt]

A link for those who don't like Guardian/Indy links: https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/631891...ouse-of-lords/

So the government keep getting defeated by an unelected body so the answer is to enlarge this unelected body so they might win in the future. how does this stand with Brexiteers who moan about unelected bodies

[malvolio]

You need to look at who is paying for those unelected people (hint; mostly it's not the UK). And they won't win anyway, all they are doing is wasting time*. The Commons can and will overrule anything from the Upper House, especially if it would breach something in their manifesto.



* This is, of course, their whole purpose: keep delaying things in the hope it will result in a pointless compromise meaning we don't actually leave the EU, merely lose all influence over it while still paying for the (non) privilege of membership. It still won't work but their too dim to understand that.

[Lance]

You need to look at who is paying for those unelected people (hint; mostly it's not the UK). And they won't win anyway, all they are doing is wasting time*. The Commons can and will overrule anything from the Upper House, especially if it would breach something in their manifesto.

* This is, of course, their whole purpose: keep delaying things in the hope it will result in a pointless compromise meaning we don't actually leave the EU, merely lose all influence over it while still paying for the (non) privilege of membership. It still won't work but their too dim to understand that.

The parliament act is what allows the Commons to overrule the Lords. To use the parliament act it has to be a manifesto item, specifically the Salisbury Convention. As you stated above.

That is one reason why Theresa may called a GE. To have Brexit in a manifesto.

However...... The question still remains though on whether a minority government can invoke the Salisbury Convention or not. It's never been done and if the Lords dug their heels in it would take a GE, with a majority government to overrule them.

IANACL


EDIT: they're

[Old Greg]

A link for those who don't like Guardian/Indy links: https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/631891...ouse-of-lords/

So the government keep getting defeated by an unelected body so the answer is to enlarge this unelected body so they might win in the future. how does this stand with Brexiteers who moan about unelected bodies

Amusingly, the Daily Mail has reverted once more to its 1930s Nazi rhetoric days.

[Old Greg]

Amusingly, the Daily Mail has reverted once more to its 1930s Nazi rhetoric days.

Just like the good old days, really.

[sasguru]

You need to look at who is paying for those unelected people (hint; mostly it's not the UK). And they won't win anyway, all they are doing is wasting time*. The Commons can and will overrule anything from the Upper House, especially if it would breach something in their manifesto.



* This is, of course, their whole purpose: keep delaying things in the hope it will result in a pointless compromise meaning we don't actually leave the EU, merely lose all influence over it while still paying for the (non) privilege of membership. It still won't work but their too dim to understand that.

It's not as if there's a majority in the commons for a "hard" a.k.a. real Brexit anyway
Which is a pity because I'd really like it to happen.

[meridian]

You need to look at who is paying for those unelected people (hint; mostly it's not the UK).

Care to elaborate? Most of them have some sort of directorship, remunerated employment, shareholding, or land and property within the UK, UK companies or public services. The register of their interests is here:
https://www.parliament.uk/mps-lords-...rds-interests/

And they won't win anyway, all they are doing is wasting time*. The Commons can and will overrule anything from the Upper House, especially if it would breach something in their manifesto.

* This is, of course, their whole purpose: keep delaying things in the hope it will result in a pointless compromise meaning we don't actually leave the EU, merely lose all influence over it while still paying for the (non) privilege of membership. It still won't work but their too dim to understand that.

It's not about winning (typical Brexiter mindset), it's about pointing out where things might not be in the best interests of the UK as a whole and referring it back to Parliament for a wider decision.

In a 52/48 decision compromise isn't pointless, it's necessary.

[malvolio]

Care to elaborate? Most of them have some sort of directorship, remunerated employment, shareholding, or land and property within the UK, UK companies or public services. The register of their interests is here:
https://www.parliament.uk/mps-lords-...rds-interests/



It's not about winning (typical Brexiter mindset), it's about pointing out where things might not be in the best interests of the UK as a whole and referring it back to Parliament for a wider decision.

In a 52/48 decision compromise isn't pointless, it's necessary.

Well, if you say so. I reserve the right to disagree.

And as usual, can't resist the usual delusional remoaner snide dig. I am not, for one thing a typical anything. I am allowed, however, to think we are ultimately better off away from the EU's management. YMMV. I couldn't care less.

Incidentally anyone, including peers of the Realm, who have worked for the EU and so receive a pension from them are required to support and promote the EU or see that pension stop. So take another look at the main opposition Lords...

[jamesbrown]

A link for those who don't like Guardian/Indy links: https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/631891...ouse-of-lords/

So the government keep getting defeated by an unelected body so the answer is to enlarge this unelected body so they might win in the future. how does this stand with Brexiteers who moan about unelected bodies

There, there, darmie, you don't need to step on every upturned spade. Leave some for sas and scootie.

Adding five ex-Tory MPs for remoan and one for Brexit hardly changes the arithmetic in the HoL.

[Whorty]

Well, if you say so. I reserve the right to disagree.

And as usual, can't resist the usual delusional remoaner snide dig. I am not, for one thing a typical anything. I am allowed, however, to think we are ultimately better off away from the EU's management. YMMV. I couldn't care less.

Oh dear, you really are pathetic aren't you my friend? That's not me calling you pathetic, by the way, that's you calling yourself pathetic for using an offensive name to describe someone who doesn't agree with you.

You gammoners really are stupid

If you have to invent an offensive term (in your little mind) to describe somebody who doesn't agree with you, then by definition you must be a fairly pathetic little