this post was submitted on 11 Nov 2024
140 points (97.3% liked)

UK Politics

3087 readers
217 users here now

General Discussion for politics in the UK.
Please don't post to both [email protected] and [email protected] .
Pick the most appropriate, and put it there.

Posts should be related to UK-centric politics, and should be either a link to a reputable news source for news, or a text post on this community.

Opinion pieces are also allowed, provided they are not misleading/misrepresented/drivel, and have proper sources.

If you think "reputable news source" needs some definition, by all means start a meta thread. (These things should be publicly discussed)

Posts should be manually submitted, not by bot. Link titles should not be editorialised.

Disappointing comments will generally be left to fester in ratio, outright horrible comments will be removed.
Message the mods if you feel something really should be removed, or if a user seems to have a pattern of awful comments.

[email protected] appears to have vanished! We can still see cached content from this link, but goodbye I guess! :'(

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] [email protected] 22 points 4 days ago (3 children)

As a long term LibDem voter, mainly because of PR, this is one of the few issues I disagree on.

Another elected house isn't desirable and I'm generally fine with it being a house full of experienced politicians and subject matter experts. I'd like to reform the appointment process to avoid the stuffing we've seen from Johnson and Truss. The Lords Spiritual should be ended as a group. I have no problem with community leaders being appointed, which may include religious leaders, but not as a fixed role in the house.

I see all of that as fairly minor reform. Not rip it up and start again.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 day ago

I think devolution of powers should be considered first. Ignore the Lords initially because they dont really matter in the grand scheme of things. When the Tories really wanted something they just submit it several times until the Lords couldn't say no.

We have good examples with Wales and Scotland, and so geographically we should do the same to England and split into 3 regions.

Southeast, Southwest and North, where in this context the "south" stretches up to Nottingham. Move the Commons to either Birmingham or Leeds, and limit their powers to the overarching national policies that would normally also cover the UK. Voting for the province would be AV, and Commons would be PR or STV. Although we should probably devolve more powers, which would get more traction if we were able to have better representation.

[–] [email protected] 27 points 4 days ago* (last edited 4 days ago) (1 children)

Get rid of the 92 hereditary peers. Birth is not a qualification for government.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 3 days ago* (last edited 3 days ago)

The legislation to get rid of them is already in progress they should be gone after this parliament ends.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 2 days ago

What if the new elected upper house worked similarly to the Australian Senate? Our House of Representatives is the same as your House of Commons (except that it uses IRV instead of the undemocratic FPTP) with single-winner districts. But the Senate uses a proportional system (STV) electing 6 Senators per state for twice the amount of time an MP is elected for. So they're relatively less concerned about the day-to-day shifting polls than MPs are, and you get a result that's much more representative of what the people actually want.

In the UK context, it might be easier to sell PR in an entirely new house than it would be to update how the Commons is elected.