Regionalise the Lords?
I often like to ask MPs why the House of Lords is allowed to scrutinise English legislation but not that of the devolved administrations. Why, I ask, should Neil Kinnock have any say on English legislation?
Invariably I am told that the House of Lords is not based on geographic constituencies so the issue of nationality and national interest does not come into it; Neil Kinnock, for example, does not sit in the House of Lords to represent Wales.
Now I hear that Hazel Blears wants the Lords to represent UK regions.
It seems that if they can't regionalise England through referenda they will do it by any means possible. How very dare they? The dirty bastards!
Trackback URL for this post:
The historic vote in favour of a 100% elected House of Lords raises the prospect of the West Lothian Question being replicated in the upper chamber.
As you will know Westminster is a bicameral parliament which means that legislation is scrutinised by a s
"Could a future Prime Minister sit in an elected House of Lords?", asked Norman Lamont on Monday.
The answer that came back was "No".
Concern was expressed that proportional representation could confer upon the Lords greater democractic legitimacy than
- Gordon Brown’s unprincipled opposition to an English parliament
- Gordon Brown’s Barnett Formula lies
- The Empire Strikes Back
- Conservative solutions to the English Question
- It is Britishness, not Englishness, that is in the dock
- Best of all worlds for Scotland, worst of all worlds for England
- What manner of federal United Kingdom do UKIP favour?
- Peter Hain vs John Redwood
- Reigniting the Barnett Formula debate
- Yes Campaign take the lead in Scottish Referendum poll