undefined | Better HN

0 pointstrebligdivad14d ago0 comments

Note that this change is not getting rid of the Lords; it's just getting rid of Hereditary piers - i.e. those passed down through generations. We'll still have Lords who have been selected by previous governments within their lifetime; so they still provide that speed bump; but do it in a way that means they were at some point chosen by an elected body.

0 comments

hunterpayne14d ago

Not sure how you think this will improve things. None of these people are elected. They likely got these positions by doing political favors. They are likely even more out of touch with the electorate. They are even more likely to make decisions based upon ideology instead of practical quality of life considerations. Seems to me this just centralizes power even more in the hands of a few. And that's the last thing the UK needs right now.

Nursie14d ago

> They are likely even more out of touch with the electorate.

Not compared to the hereditary peers.

In theory these people have proved themselves useful in some way and bring expertise to the upper chamber, rather than just being born in the right family. In practice there is some of that and some political cronyism.

> Seems to me this just centralizes power even more in the hands of a few.

That is exactly what hereditary peerage is. The few, by definition. The aristocracy.

t4356214d ago

Being out of touch with the electorate is the thing they have as a feature over the house of commons.

i.e. they're not trying to win the next election.

They're also not there because of the favours they've done existing politicians.

I don't think this is "great" but it does make me wonder if the people who want an end to herditary peers are really going to like what they get.

1 more reply

glyco13d ago

> That is exactly what hereditary peerage is. The few, by definition. The aristocracy.

Not true at all - there's nothing special about having a rich land-owner in your ancestry - most people do.

In fact, now, after a few centuries of reversion to the mean, the hereditary peers are the only people in government who are representative, in the statistical sense.

(Not that this is related in any way to the actual reason why this is being done - the actual motive is that a hereditary peer is necessarily British, and Starmer hates the British and wants them disenfranchised so that he can continue with their destruction. But that's another story..)

dotancohen14d ago

You argue that a lot of things are likely. Why don't you take the time to check instead of slander?

j / k navigate · click thread line to collapse