and possibly also worried if fans failed to respect the minute’s silence?
Work is continuing, cinemas are continuing, rugby and cricket are continuing and so should football. How much more significant to have had thousands fall silent at the games as a mark of collective respect for her majesty’s life of service than to have thousands sitting at home or shopping in Tesco instead.
With the greatest respect Chris that feels like a bit of an empty soundbite type statement with not a lot of substance.
if a self regulated unelected revising second chamber could hold the elected primary legislating chamber more effectively to account providing stronger checks and balances and better legislation, surely that can only be better than an ineffective second class replica playing party politics with an illusion of democratic mandate?
Just to make the point by the way that how you structure the second chamber is an entirely different point to whether or not you stick with a monarchy head of state or an elected one.
But an appointed chamber is more subject to party politics than an elected one.
If the appointed chamber was full of experts that I agree with, it would definitely be better. But a) it wouldn’t be, and b) if it was other people would rightly not be happy about it.
The fundamental point is that there is no way to create a fair appointed chamber, so that’s why the only real option is elections. Or a lottery.
I think the root of our disagreement may be what actually we want the second chamber to do.
if you want it to initiate legislation on broadly equal status to the primary house then it must be elected accepting all the flaws of democracy. But all that results in would be duplication conflict and either paralysis or supinicity. In which case we would be better to simply abandon the second chamber altogether.
the second chamber we gave and need job is to be subservient to the primary democratic chamber but to be required to scrutinise legislation more effectively than possible in the primary chamber and if necessary to refer such legislation back to the primary house with the recommendation “this is dumb think again”
actually the existing HoL does that function reasonably well but it requires integrity and it’s purpose to be respected by both main political leaders and sadly the Bannonesque populism requires checks and balances to be systematically destroyed as Johnson enthusiastically pursued and given the people she has surrounded herself with I see no sign of Truss discontinuing. So sadly what worked on “honour” now needs to be codified. The ability of party leaders to appoint needs to be removed.
What’s this supinicity all about @DevC ? I know that tall, posh geyser (whose double-barrelled name I can never remember) has been seen supine in the House on occasion and the interregnum during the interminable leadership hustings was a period of political paralysis but supinicity is a new one to me.
It’s not lawyers you need, it is expertise in the field.
that expertise needs to be sourced by careful consideration of need and skills of candidates
democratic election by electors with no understanding of the role they are electing for inevitably means that choice will be purely on party labels. At best it would be an illusion of democratic accountability.
in practise you would get poorer quality scrutiny and replace it with more tribal party political posturing
we differ between pragmatism and principle. I am more interested in outcomes and less concerned by process, you the other way round.
on this occasion pragmatism wins. I have other things to do now. Pragmatically I have to end the conversation. Besides I think we might be boring others.
Is there an official source for the date of the funeral? As of midday the BBC are reporting that the bank holiday has been approved but not the date. I accept that the Monday is probable, but it is not confirmed.
Comments
But surely @Chris if you advocating for an elected revising chamber, you must have some thought on why it would be better?
This is weird https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-62847329
and possibly also worried if fans failed to respect the minute’s silence?
Work is continuing, cinemas are continuing, rugby and cricket are continuing and so should football. How much more significant to have had thousands fall silent at the games as a mark of collective respect for her majesty’s life of service than to have thousands sitting at home or shopping in Tesco instead.
Because appointed experts would in practice be political appointees. So in principal it is better to have democratically elected members.
Whilst sad for the passing of QE 2nd I do feel the monarchy is part of some endemic problems in society, and some suggestions here are quite good.
But realistically won’t it take a Civil War to change it? Charles and his followers wouldn’t go quietly surely?
Well all three previous civil wars happened with a Charles on the throne...
https://twitter.com/stokaljona/status/1568317712438562816?s=20&t=kR2uPhTOArgPkHPx94DtxQ
With the greatest respect Chris that feels like a bit of an empty soundbite type statement with not a lot of substance.
if a self regulated unelected revising second chamber could hold the elected primary legislating chamber more effectively to account providing stronger checks and balances and better legislation, surely that can only be better than an ineffective second class replica playing party politics with an illusion of democratic mandate?
Just to make the point by the way that how you structure the second chamber is an entirely different point to whether or not you stick with a monarchy head of state or an elected one.
Wasn't the War of the Roses between Henry V1 and Edward 1V a civil war ?
A good read on the decision to postpone all footy https://theathletic.com/3580783/2022/09/10/football-matches-postponed-premier-league
But an appointed chamber is more subject to party politics than an elected one.
If the appointed chamber was full of experts that I agree with, it would definitely be better. But a) it wouldn’t be, and b) if it was other people would rightly not be happy about it.
The fundamental point is that there is no way to create a fair appointed chamber, so that’s why the only real option is elections. Or a lottery.
https://twitter.com/samcunningham/status/1568195178862624771?t=UKW_bZR8wlfd-cOA9X1yfw&s=19
I think the root of our disagreement may be what actually we want the second chamber to do.
if you want it to initiate legislation on broadly equal status to the primary house then it must be elected accepting all the flaws of democracy. But all that results in would be duplication conflict and either paralysis or supinicity. In which case we would be better to simply abandon the second chamber altogether.
the second chamber we gave and need job is to be subservient to the primary democratic chamber but to be required to scrutinise legislation more effectively than possible in the primary chamber and if necessary to refer such legislation back to the primary house with the recommendation “this is dumb think again”
actually the existing HoL does that function reasonably well but it requires integrity and it’s purpose to be respected by both main political leaders and sadly the Bannonesque populism requires checks and balances to be systematically destroyed as Johnson enthusiastically pursued and given the people she has surrounded herself with I see no sign of Truss discontinuing. So sadly what worked on “honour” now needs to be codified. The ability of party leaders to appoint needs to be removed.
What’s this supinicity all about @DevC ? I know that tall, posh geyser (whose double-barrelled name I can never remember) has been seen supine in the House on occasion and the interregnum during the interminable leadership hustings was a period of political paralysis but supinicity is a new one to me.
If the second chamber is purely administrative we might as well have one chamber and hire more civil service lawyers to write better legislation.
If the job of scrutiny involves political opinion on legislation then it needs a democratic mandate.
This is who sits in the current HoL after being appointed for life:
https://twitter.com/Lord_Sugar/status/1568305030066995200?s=20&t=aiNInM5q8bZYUBlSq87tww
It’s not lawyers you need, it is expertise in the field.
that expertise needs to be sourced by careful consideration of need and skills of candidates
democratic election by electors with no understanding of the role they are electing for inevitably means that choice will be purely on party labels. At best it would be an illusion of democratic accountability.
in practise you would get poorer quality scrutiny and replace it with more tribal party political posturing
But appointing experts is in itself a politically contentious decision. You might not want it to be, but it is.
There is no way for this ‘that expertise needs to be sourced by careful consideration of need and skills of candidates’ to happen.
thats why in this new age where politicians cannot be trusted to appoint with integrity, you take that appointment process away from them.
there is no perfect solution but electors voting for party badges is for this role probably the worst solution of all.
It’s an ahistorical view that anyone could ever be trusted to appoint with integrity.
Which is why we need now to codify the process
But what alternative process is there to political appointment, election or lottery? Mensa tests?
as we have seen election doesnt work.
we differ between pragmatism and principle. I am more interested in outcomes and less concerned by process, you the other way round.
on this occasion pragmatism wins. I have other things to do now. Pragmatically I have to end the conversation. Besides I think we might be boring others.
It isn’t pragmatism unless you can suggest a way of appointment. Have we seen election doesn’t work? It’s used in many countries.
Monday 19th it is then with a Bank Holiday thrown in for good measure.
I wonder if the people not happy with football being postponed will be asking for the day off?
Or opting to work and be paid double time.
It’s not as entertaining as football but at least we have ringside seats.
How are those two things in any way related?
Is there an official source for the date of the funeral? As of midday the BBC are reporting that the bank holiday has been approved but not the date. I accept that the Monday is probable, but it is not confirmed.