FabSwingers.com mobile

Join us FREE, we're FREE to use

Web's largest swingers site since 2006.

Already registered?
Login here

Back to forum list
Back to Politics

Time the the Lords to go . . .

Jump to newest
 

By *atEvolution OP   Couple
over a year ago

atlantisEVOLUTION Swingers Club. Stoke

https://news.sky.com/story/peers-in-house-of-lords-charged-taxpayers-more-than-46-000-on-day-of-tributes-to-prince-philip-12379857

"Peers in House of Lords charged taxpayers more than £46,000 on day of tributes to Prince Philip"

But what to replace oversight with?

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *atEvolution OP   Couple
over a year ago

atlantisEVOLUTION Swingers Club. Stoke

Time for the Lords to go . . ?

typo

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *ostafunMan
over a year ago

near ipswich

yeah i think so we have got rid of all the dead wood in Brussels now time to do the same here.I would keep around 50 just for tradition but we dont need 600 odd.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *oxychick35Couple
over a year ago

thornaby

Fuck tradition get rid of the lot for me

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *ercuryMan
over a year ago

Grantham

There must be some that will do it for a basic income.

Not the £350 per day and heavily subsidised restaurant.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

Do we actually need any unelected beaurocrats ruling over us?

...and getting paid a small fortune to do so?

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

Counter opinion:. A second house that is a) full of experts and b) not writing laws in order to stay in power adds a layer of accountability and review imo.

Not sure we need so many, nor do I like how many are elected via political allignemnt, but I see there is a role, especially in our FPTP system whereby it's only a handful of swing voters in a handful of constitucies that need to be persuaded to get into power.

And if you are wanting experts, you may need to ensure the compensation is appropriate. Or you end up in a place where people are doing it for other reasons.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"Counter opinion:. A second house that is a) full of experts and b) not writing laws in order to stay in power adds a layer of accountability and review imo.

Not sure we need so many, nor do I like how many are elected via political allignemnt, but I see there is a role, especially in our FPTP system whereby it's only a handful of swing voters in a handful of constitucies that need to be persuaded to get into power.

And if you are wanting experts, you may need to ensure the compensation is appropriate. Or you end up in a place where people are doing it for other reasons. "

But surely we only need them because the current political system does not work and they are effectively (hopefully) a safeguard.

Better to have a political system that can be trusted, represents the voters (FPTP does not) and where politicians are paid a good remuneration but are also accountable for their actions just like in any private sector business.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *ebbie69Couple
over a year ago

milton keynes


"Counter opinion:. A second house that is a) full of experts and b) not writing laws in order to stay in power adds a layer of accountability and review imo.

Not sure we need so many, nor do I like how many are elected via political allignemnt, but I see there is a role, especially in our FPTP system whereby it's only a handful of swing voters in a handful of constitucies that need to be persuaded to get into power.

And if you are wanting experts, you may need to ensure the compensation is appropriate. Or you end up in a place where people are doing it for other reasons.

But surely we only need them because the current political system does not work and they are effectively (hopefully) a safeguard.

Better to have a political system that can be trusted, represents the voters (FPTP does not) and where politicians are paid a good remuneration but are also accountable for their actions just like in any private sector business."

I kind of agree and the amount they get paid and claim is crazy. Also not sure we need so many. However what would you replace them with or would you not have an upper house at all. I think politicians in all systems need their laws to be checked

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"Counter opinion:. A second house that is a) full of experts and b) not writing laws in order to stay in power adds a layer of accountability and review imo.

Not sure we need so many, nor do I like how many are elected via political allignemnt, but I see there is a role, especially in our FPTP system whereby it's only a handful of swing voters in a handful of constitucies that need to be persuaded to get into power.

And if you are wanting experts, you may need to ensure the compensation is appropriate. Or you end up in a place where people are doing it for other reasons.

But surely we only need them because the current political system does not work and they are effectively (hopefully) a safeguard.

Better to have a political system that can be trusted, represents the voters (FPTP does not) and where politicians are paid a good remuneration but are also accountable for their actions just like in any private sector business.

I kind of agree and the amount they get paid and claim is crazy. Also not sure we need so many. However what would you replace them with or would you not have an upper house at all. I think politicians in all systems need their laws to be checked"

Id replace with experts only. And have a way of appointing them that doesnt mean those on power can load. Maybe based on PR rather than MPs. The shit show with the NIP shows the fallout of allowing the lower house have too much control on detail !!

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
Post new Message to Thread
back to top