Heseltine Sacked
Discussion
TTwiggy said:
'traitor' (even with a small 't') is a rather emotive word and one that has been far too freely bandied about of late (in my humble opinion). It was the use of this word that I was questioning. I really don't care much one way or the other over the EU/Brexit but I do care about the use of words like that, as they have the potential to lead to worrying ends.
It's the first time I've heard it in this context.Trying to scupper a democratic vote in favour of a corrupt foreign entity is quite definitely traitorous.
Jimboka said:
I doubt that he's too bothered . A small sacrifice to pay.
History will prove him right .
Such prescience!History will prove him right .
What on earth do you do with all those lottery wins? At a guess, nothing, as they're not happening - with a dodgy crystal ball, wishful thinking is cheap but liable to disappoint.
As to being sacked, he should never have been appointed.
dandarez said:
More reason to sign the petition. Now 116,000
https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions/170686
This must be the first ever petition to reach 100,000 signatures and not receive any mention on the news or in the papers.
I lie, seems just the Express mentioned it when it reached the ton.
What about the rest? Not a whisper. How very bloody EU of them.
Spread it for more to sign - deadline is 2 May. Could be quite a number by that date.
Surely the last thing we want is another elected body?https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions/170686
This must be the first ever petition to reach 100,000 signatures and not receive any mention on the news or in the papers.
I lie, seems just the Express mentioned it when it reached the ton.
What about the rest? Not a whisper. How very bloody EU of them.
Spread it for more to sign - deadline is 2 May. Could be quite a number by that date.
What would it do- vote the same way as the other elected body?
Isn't it good it's a bunch of people derived in another manner providing checks and balances to the system?
saaby93 said:
dandarez said:
More reason to sign the petition. Now 116,000
https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions/170686
This must be the first ever petition to reach 100,000 signatures and not receive any mention on the news or in the papers.
I lie, seems just the Express mentioned it when it reached the ton.
What about the rest? Not a whisper. How very bloody EU of them.
Spread it for more to sign - deadline is 2 May. Could be quite a number by that date.
Surely the last thing we want is another elected body?https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions/170686
This must be the first ever petition to reach 100,000 signatures and not receive any mention on the news or in the papers.
I lie, seems just the Express mentioned it when it reached the ton.
What about the rest? Not a whisper. How very bloody EU of them.
Spread it for more to sign - deadline is 2 May. Could be quite a number by that date.
What would it do- vote the same way as the other elected body?
Isn't it good it's a bunch of people derived in another manner providing checks and balances to the system?
See also under judges.
gothatway said:
I was surprised to hear him say this morning that he had never met Teresa May. I would have thought that a PM would have met all the "big beasts" in the governing party within a few months of taking office.
I think a lot of his engagements were on a voluntary basis. He was very complimentary to TM in the interview.The thrust of his argument seemed to be that the other 27 Parliaments were guaranteed a vote on the deal but that the UK one was not.
It's frequently said that HoL is an advisory and clarifying role for the purposes of correcting clumsy mistakes in primary legislation that might cause difficulty when decisions are appealed. If so, they should not be able to add amendments, merely advise on constitutional and legal matters so that the elected house can be sure their work is as intended.
It follows that appointment to the HoL should not be in the gift of PM's for political advantage but in recognition of constitutional knowledge and legal expertise. No wonder they suffer from a bad press. 800 should be 100 and the primary motivation should be 'in the national interest' and salaried.
It follows that appointment to the HoL should not be in the gift of PM's for political advantage but in recognition of constitutional knowledge and legal expertise. No wonder they suffer from a bad press. 800 should be 100 and the primary motivation should be 'in the national interest' and salaried.
Thorodin said:
It's frequently said that HoL is an advisory and clarifying role for the purposes of correcting clumsy mistakes in primary legislation that might cause difficulty when decisions are appealed. If so, they should not be able to add amendments, merely advise on constitutional and legal matters so that the elected house can be sure their work is as intended.
Surely that is what they do 
They propose amendments and bat it back to the commons
If the commons dont like it they can overule
- although that's unusual as there'll be a reason they've got it back in their laps
At the moment my biggest concern is that pulling this stunt is going to create an ever growing desire to "fix" the HoL, and the slightly gangsterish overtones of that is intended here. Unfortunately hard cases make bad law, and I fear we may end up with worse from the point of view of democracy, plainly the last round of "reforms" to the Lords have left us in a worse state than before.
saaby93 said:
dandarez said:
More reason to sign the petition. Now 116,000
https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions/170686
This must be the first ever petition to reach 100,000 signatures and not receive any mention on the news or in the papers.
I lie, seems just the Express mentioned it when it reached the ton.
What about the rest? Not a whisper. How very bloody EU of them.
Spread it for more to sign - deadline is 2 May. Could be quite a number by that date.
Surely the last thing we want is another elected body?https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions/170686
This must be the first ever petition to reach 100,000 signatures and not receive any mention on the news or in the papers.
I lie, seems just the Express mentioned it when it reached the ton.
What about the rest? Not a whisper. How very bloody EU of them.
Spread it for more to sign - deadline is 2 May. Could be quite a number by that date.
What would it do- vote the same way as the other elected body?
Isn't it good it's a bunch of people derived in another manner providing checks and balances to the system?
The ones who arrive, walk in, sign, walk out - just to obtain their payment. Daily! We should be rid of those for starters.
The Lord(s) Speaker, Baroness D'Souza, actually had a moan about these 'Lords' doing nowt yet claiming their daily 300 quid expenses.
That didn't go too well when the papers looked into her and hey presto the skeletons danced out of 'her' cupboard!
It was discovered that she racked up £230 bill keeping her chauffeur-driven car waiting 4 hrs while she popped off to an opera - hardly a mile from Parliament!
She also racked up £270 holding a car for nearly 5 hrs while she lunched with the Japanese ambassador, again in central London.
She'd frittered thousands of pounds flying business class, hotels costing up to £300 a night and ordering £123 of room service for one 'breakfast meeting'.
Lady D'Souza, is the Lord Speaker. This is no more than a ceremonial post. She does little more than leads peers into the chamber at the start of each sitting and that's about it!
It was a role first created in 2006. Lady D'Souza is the second holder of the post. You basically do bugger-all, claim everything (like keeping a taxi waiting for 5 hours!).
But best of all the job comes with a miserly salary of just, are you ready for it?
£101,000! Plus an allowance of up to £36,000.
You said, and I quote: 'Isn't it good it's a bunch of people derived in another manner providing checks and balances to the system?'
But it's not is it?
Really, I/we should want it abolished, not scaled down.
But there are some, only some, who are experienced Lords and we need those. The rest should be put out to grass.
dandarez said:
I don't want another elected body. I want a (hugely scaled-down) separate body that and who 'work' for us, and in the literal sense too, ie: not like a proportion of them who simply attend just to get their daily 300 notes!
Absolutely. Any elected body would need funds to support each candidature, and that would inevitably lead to the same old same old political parties getting involved. Allegiance to any political party should be foresworn on appointment, which should be for a limited tenure - say 10 years, during which they cannot be fired, but could be asked to resign on grounds of deteriorating health ? Anyone who had held a cabinet post would be ineligible. Who would make the appointments though - maybe the Cabinet Secretary, or a selected group of those serving ? Appointees should have made a proven contribution to our society, preferably in business or science (reluctantly I suppose the arts would have to be included - can you tell I'm an engineer ?) and built a reputation, which of course implies a minimum age.Do any western democracies have a second chamber which is not elected on party lines ?
At the risk of derailing the thread, I would like to see an elected HoL elected on fixed terms and with the elections mid term for the HoC. so as to give the people a chance to modulate a bad parliament. Also I would like to see set qualification criteria so we don't get gaggles of party specific lovies and career politicians.
I don't know what all those criteria should be but I would hope to avoid party hacks and those appointed because they have contributed to party coffers, so at a minimum, they should not be appointed by sitting governments. I also think Lords should be of a minimum age so they have serious life experience.
I don't know what all those criteria should be but I would hope to avoid party hacks and those appointed because they have contributed to party coffers, so at a minimum, they should not be appointed by sitting governments. I also think Lords should be of a minimum age so they have serious life experience.
Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff