@HolmerBlue I suspect the reason the post from Blue_ since_1990 got a thumbs down is because the sentiment expressed is open to debate. Your post about why don't people go and live somewhere else is actually cut from the same cloth of extremism that you associate with those less enthusiastic for the monarchy - the vast majority of whom have simply expressed reservations and not shown disrespect unless challenging things is now regarded as disrespectful. The Queen didn't comment much about her philosophy of life but I'm pretty sure that its not reflected in your tone of post. Its really not as binary as you pretend. I apologise if I've missed any subtle irony in your post.
Well first you have to work out what you want the second revising chamber to be
its job is not to be equal or competing with the primary elected chamber. It’s job is to say to the primary chamber - that proposed law or element of the law sounds dumb - think it through again.
so what you need to do that are experts in a range of fields - education social care healthcare business environment etc not more politicians with a remit to say to the politicians in the primary chamber “that won’t work for xxxx reason for think again”
what you don’t want is yet more people elected due to their party badge and the electorates current view of the Government nor do you want mates of the PM or donors.
so move responsibility for populating the second chamber to a committee of the second chamber - we are a bit short of technology experts - right let’s get a couple.
cut the pageantry and lord stuff just a group of experts in each field reviewing legislation and if it doesn’t work referring it back to elected politicians with a message “are you sure? Seems pretty dumb to us and we really understand this area of life”
I had huge respect for Queen Elizabeth & the way she represented the UK & conducted herself on the global stage but as a republican I consider the monarchy & aristocracy that surrounds it to be totally anachronistic in this day & age. I was hoping that her passing would signal the end of the monarchy in its current form & the huge expense they are to the state, but sadly I suspect we will see little or no change whilst Charles is King & we have a Tory government.
Having lost one of my parents I of course, on a purely human level, have sympathy & empathy for her children & family, as I do for any one in similar circumstances.
Other than the obvious changes to the stamps, bank notes & coinage & the dirge like national anthem, her passing will not impact my life in the slightest.
As for the football, I would have preferred games to have gone ahead but in the current media climate fully understand why the FA, EFL & PL didn't want to put their heads above the parapet. The only surprise was that they had no contingency plan in place, I mean she was 97 & her health was deteriorating since she lost her husband, surely somebody somewhere in those organisations would have thought "what do we do if...".
Finally, I find it wierd that socialist/left leaning organisations like the RMT & CWU have cancelled their strikes out of respect for an institution that they loathe, but that always was the strange dichotomy of the British working class.
Thanks Dev. It would certainly be better than what we’ve got. Would need a pretty robust process for establishing who the experts are - and a high degree of transparency around how they are chosen (this would appear to be the potential weak spot with scope for calling in favours).
While the experts idea has immediate appeal I have deep reservations. I can’t imagine a system in which ultimately they aren’t political appointees, and at that point would it not be better to have an elected second chamber?
There was a proposal put forward (possibly by Bill Bragg and others) that seats in the second chamber should be awarded post ballot on the basis of share of the vote, so not another election, but each party puts forward a list of names of and they are awarded on that basis. I have neither enough interest or time to expand on or defend this for 27 pages...it was just a suggestion I thought seemed sensible
@DevC if you expect government ministers to have any interest in willingly debating with people who actually know things, I fear you do not understand politics at all! 😉
The flaw with elected revising chambers is very evident with for example the police commissioners. The electorate chooses them solely on party badge not expertise or knowledge of policing.
The primary and secondary revising chamber have two very different roles. The primary one must be elected. They choose what we are to do. The revising chambers role is to scrutinise and recommend revisions not to repeat the role of the primary chamber. That needs expertise not more hacks chosen by party badge.
To be fair they did have a contingency plan but with so many variables not one cast in stone quite rightly. The most important unknown factor was to see how the public would react - would it be a Diana style almost fascistic mourning frenzy or (as it has so far turned out to be) a far more mature "oh that's a shame Ah well" reaction. The appropriate response would very much differ.
A committee of themselves identifies weaknesses and recruits. Maybe five year renewable terms?? I guess the appointing committee would be seeking people not ineffective across the board. More likely to find them I think than electors choosing based on political badge colour or politicians rewarding donors or cronys.
I am using my son's season ticket. I bought him a season ticket to be guaranteed away tickets and tickets for Wembley etc.
Bought him one in the middle of three spare seats so I can just buy the one next to him as and when we can get to games.
The club's new incentive to get people in means any adult can use a kid's season ticket for midweek league fixtures, on the assumption (correct assumption) that young kids won't make it. Great thinking from the club.
What benefit does an elected revising chamber give?
do you think elected police commissioners for example have been a success or do they highlight that an election for second chamber revisers would simply become a referendum on tribal party lines?
I’m far from an expert on any of this, but I would look to the numbers of countries with elected second chambers and the numbers with appointed second chambers and take from this an indication of which is more likely to work in practice.
Comments
A debate to be conducted in a couple of weeks time
@HolmerBlue I suspect the reason the post from Blue_ since_1990 got a thumbs down is because the sentiment expressed is open to debate. Your post about why don't people go and live somewhere else is actually cut from the same cloth of extremism that you associate with those less enthusiastic for the monarchy - the vast majority of whom have simply expressed reservations and not shown disrespect unless challenging things is now regarded as disrespectful. The Queen didn't comment much about her philosophy of life but I'm pretty sure that its not reflected in your tone of post. Its really not as binary as you pretend. I apologise if I've missed any subtle irony in your post.
Not sure how you conclude losing the monarchy would lead to us becoming anything like any of those countries @HolmerBlue
There are plenty of places in Europe that manage to be much more desirable than the UK without a monarchy in place
I think only one poster has disrespected the Queen...?
I'll give you a Monarchy for a reformed, elected Second House in Parliament.
Reformed revising chamber - yes
elected - no
That’s an interesting view. Do you have a preferred alternative?
(I am in no way a fan of an elected second chamber but not quite sure I can see a more equitable way of providing the required balance).
Well first you have to work out what you want the second revising chamber to be
its job is not to be equal or competing with the primary elected chamber. It’s job is to say to the primary chamber - that proposed law or element of the law sounds dumb - think it through again.
so what you need to do that are experts in a range of fields - education social care healthcare business environment etc not more politicians with a remit to say to the politicians in the primary chamber “that won’t work for xxxx reason for think again”
what you don’t want is yet more people elected due to their party badge and the electorates current view of the Government nor do you want mates of the PM or donors.
so move responsibility for populating the second chamber to a committee of the second chamber - we are a bit short of technology experts - right let’s get a couple.
cut the pageantry and lord stuff just a group of experts in each field reviewing legislation and if it doesn’t work referring it back to elected politicians with a message “are you sure? Seems pretty dumb to us and we really understand this area of life”
I had huge respect for Queen Elizabeth & the way she represented the UK & conducted herself on the global stage but as a republican I consider the monarchy & aristocracy that surrounds it to be totally anachronistic in this day & age. I was hoping that her passing would signal the end of the monarchy in its current form & the huge expense they are to the state, but sadly I suspect we will see little or no change whilst Charles is King & we have a Tory government.
Having lost one of my parents I of course, on a purely human level, have sympathy & empathy for her children & family, as I do for any one in similar circumstances.
Other than the obvious changes to the stamps, bank notes & coinage & the dirge like national anthem, her passing will not impact my life in the slightest.
As for the football, I would have preferred games to have gone ahead but in the current media climate fully understand why the FA, EFL & PL didn't want to put their heads above the parapet. The only surprise was that they had no contingency plan in place, I mean she was 97 & her health was deteriorating since she lost her husband, surely somebody somewhere in those organisations would have thought "what do we do if...".
Finally, I find it wierd that socialist/left leaning organisations like the RMT & CWU have cancelled their strikes out of respect for an institution that they loathe, but that always was the strange dichotomy of the British working class.
Thanks Dev. It would certainly be better than what we’ve got. Would need a pretty robust process for establishing who the experts are - and a high degree of transparency around how they are chosen (this would appear to be the potential weak spot with scope for calling in favours).
While the experts idea has immediate appeal I have deep reservations. I can’t imagine a system in which ultimately they aren’t political appointees, and at that point would it not be better to have an elected second chamber?
There was a proposal put forward (possibly by Bill Bragg and others) that seats in the second chamber should be awarded post ballot on the basis of share of the vote, so not another election, but each party puts forward a list of names of and they are awarded on that basis. I have neither enough interest or time to expand on or defend this for 27 pages...it was just a suggestion I thought seemed sensible
@DevC if you expect government ministers to have any interest in willingly debating with people who actually know things, I fear you do not understand politics at all! 😉
'The only surprise was that (FA, EFL & PL) had no contingency plan in place,'
@Erroll_Sims that was the only thing I did not find surprising!
The flaw with elected revising chambers is very evident with for example the police commissioners. The electorate chooses them solely on party badge not expertise or knowledge of policing.
The primary and secondary revising chamber have two very different roles. The primary one must be elected. They choose what we are to do. The revising chambers role is to scrutinise and recommend revisions not to repeat the role of the primary chamber. That needs expertise not more hacks chosen by party badge.
To be fair they did have a contingency plan but with so many variables not one cast in stone quite rightly. The most important unknown factor was to see how the public would react - would it be a Diana style almost fascistic mourning frenzy or (as it has so far turned out to be) a far more mature "oh that's a shame Ah well" reaction. The appropriate response would very much differ.
Who appoints these experts though and for how long? How much are you going to pay them?
And experts can be brilliant in their field, and yet worse than ineffective in others.
On the plus side - it means I can use my son's season ticket for another Tuesday night fixture :-)
Must admit I thought you were saying you'd be using a kid's ticket for a second there.
Then thought,. how would that work, if he was a kid, he'd be with you 😃
A committee of themselves identifies weaknesses and recruits. Maybe five year renewable terms?? I guess the appointing committee would be seeking people not ineffective across the board. More likely to find them I think than electors choosing based on political badge colour or politicians rewarding donors or cronys.
I am using my son's season ticket. I bought him a season ticket to be guaranteed away tickets and tickets for Wembley etc.
Bought him one in the middle of three spare seats so I can just buy the one next to him as and when we can get to games.
The club's new incentive to get people in means any adult can use a kid's season ticket for midweek league fixtures, on the assumption (correct assumption) that young kids won't make it. Great thinking from the club.
Are there any examples of appointed second chambers that have been successful? I think most bicameral legislatures have two elected chambers.
What benefit does an elected revising chamber give?
do you think elected police commissioners for example have been a success or do they highlight that an election for second chamber revisers would simply become a referendum on tribal party lines?
We are not very good at voting. A continually evolving monarchy is the best way.
I find this debate not just disrespectful but distasteful at this current time. Is there a way to block / ignore a thread?
No, but you know what the content of the thread is now, so just don't come on it for a little while if that's how you feel?
My elected mayor (who is also the police commissioner) is doing a much better job than the national government.
I’m far from an expert on any of this, but I would look to the numbers of countries with elected second chambers and the numbers with appointed second chambers and take from this an indication of which is more likely to work in practice.
There are no neutral experts.