A cruel sport that’s an excuse for a few upper class twats to watch a fox get torn apart by rabid dogs?
Oh and nice work picking up a pretty small part of my argument and completely disregarding the rest of it.
[QUOTE=dirty harry;20740375]To those saying that the House of Lords stop parliament passing stupid shit, I'm afraid you're wrong.
The House of Lords can only reject something three times before it's automatically passed above them and on to the Queen.
This is why the House of Lords is completely useless.[/QUOTE]
If they reject something three times, it might bring the public eye on the proposal, and get some changes made.
Another piece of British tradition down the drain.
[QUOTE=A.C.I.D;20741262]A cruel sport that’s an excuse for a few upper class twats to watch a fox get torn apart by rabid dogs?
Oh and nice work picking up a pretty small part of my argument and completely disregarding the rest of it.[/QUOTE]
If I'd give a fuck about foxes I'd say it's cruel but I do not. Same as any hunting.
Yes, I usually comment a part of the post that I disagree, a common habit on commenting.
The House of Lords is an anachronism and needs to be replaced, it's ridiculous that some of the most powerful people in the country are unelected.
At least we mostly got rid of Spiritual Lords already, that shit was whacked out stupid.
Lets not turn this into a debate about fox hunting alright?
I simply used it as an exemple of them clearly not using their powers correctly.
[QUOTE=Cypher_09;20741290]Another piece of British tradition down the drain.[/QUOTE]
Yes, I'm sure we will all miss the great tradition of having unelected members of the upper-class make huge political decisions.
Bad idea.
The Senate of the United Kingdom sounds weird.
[QUOTE=A.C.I.D;20741315]Lets not turn this into a debate about fox hunting alright?
I simply used it as an exemple of them clearly not using their powers correctly.[/QUOTE]
Oh, ok, you can probably tell some other examples about using their powers improperly then.
[QUOTE=smurfy;20741316]Yes, I'm sure we will all miss the great tradition of having unelected members of the upper-class make huge political decisions.[/QUOTE]
Appointed by the Queen and the Prime-Minister. It's not like they are randomly picked idiots off the street.
Tradition is tradition nonetheless, and we hardly have any left.
Its a power that they use very very rarely as I stated in my orginal post.
However theres The Digital Economy Bill that was proposed by the HL that wanted to block access to peer-to-peer websites that host some pirated stuff.
[editline]03:31PM[/editline]
[QUOTE=Cypher_09;20741387]Appointed by the Queen and the Prime-Minister. It's not like they are randomly picked idiots off the street.
Tradition is tradition nonetheless, and we hardly have any left.[/QUOTE]
No they randomly pick rich people.
Thats so much better.
[QUOTE=Cypher_09;20741387]Appointed by the Queen and the Prime-Minister. It's not like they are randomly picked idiots off the street.
Tradition is tradition nonetheless, and we hardly have any left.[/QUOTE]
Wow this is a dumb argument.
Bad. Very bad.
No.
See, the more different sources of power there are, the harder it is to pass your shit through. The Lords rejected the ID Card bill 5 times before Labour started putting in life peers to force the thing through.
We need a more powerful House of Lords full of hereditary peers - it'll give the upper class something to do. Make it a non-partisan House designed to check on the Government. Force the Lords to actually come, and have full transparency about incomes and donations. Make them teach their kids about life in the Lords. Give the country some stability.
Tradition of the ruling upper class making political decisions? Sounds like you guys had your shit on straight.
I'm still pissed off at that BNP episode of Question Time. Neither Nick Griffin nor his party will EVER get into power, but ALL the questions were towards him, or to other people asking how much of a bell end Nick Griffin is.
Meanwhile Jack Straw just sits there, when he should have been the subject of the most scrutiny. HE is in power, HE is Justice Secretary, HE is more important.
If you want to yell at a bigot you do it in your own fucking time.
[QUOTE=smurfy;20741316]Yes, I'm sure we will all miss the great tradition of having unelected members of the upper-class make huge political decisions.[/QUOTE]
we will, that statement is correct without the intended sarcasm
[editline]04:27PM[/editline]
[QUOTE=lazyguy;20742025]I'm still pissed off at that BNP episode of Question Time. Neither Nick Griffin nor his party will EVER get into power, but ALL the questions were towards him, or to other people asking how much of a bell end Nick Griffin is.
Meanwhile Jack Straw just sits there, when he should have been the subject of the most scrutiny. HE is in power, HE is Justice Secretary, HE is more important.
If you want to yell at a bigot you do it in your own fucking time.[/QUOTE]
if you were watching you would have seen that straw made a complete arse of himself
[editline]04:29PM[/editline]
[QUOTE=BANNED USER;20742015]Tradition of the ruling upper class making political decisions? Sounds like you guys had your shit on straight.[/QUOTE]
that changed 100 years ago
the system is fine as it is, this is just another step towards a 'perfect' democracy :rolleye:
[QUOTE=lazyguy;20742025]I'm still pissed off at that BNP episode of Question Time. Neither Nick Griffin nor his party will EVER get into power, but ALL the questions were towards him, or to other people asking how much of a bell end Nick Griffin is.
Meanwhile Jack Straw just sits there, when he should have been the subject of the most scrutiny. HE is in power, HE is Justice Secretary, HE is more important.
If you want to yell at a bigot you do it in your own fucking time.[/QUOTE]
Why did you post this here
[QUOTE=EnenehV2;20742134]
if you were watching you would have seen that straw made a complete arse of himself
[/QUOTE]
It was the first time I have ever seen a politician completely silent on regards to his immigrant father refusing to fight during WWII, when he had just been talking about how immigrants greatly aided us during the war.
Fuck yes, one step closer to getting rid of this awful monarchy.
[QUOTE=Deadly-Virus;20742510]Fuck yes, one step closer to getting rid of this awful monarchy.[/QUOTE]
The monarchy is unlikely to be scrapped any time soon because it brings in a lot of tourists, is central to our international image and has no real political power any more.
Yeah like that is ever going to happen.
[QUOTE=A.C.I.D;20741262]A cruel sport that’s an excuse for a few upper class twats to watch a fox get torn apart by rabid dogs?
Oh and nice work picking up a pretty small part of my argument and completely disregarding the rest of it.[/QUOTE]
THINK OF TEH INNOSENT ANEEMALS
*Munches beef*
House of Lords always seemed idiotic to me. I can understand it's purposes, but particularly in this day and age we hardly need a form of "nobility" in regards to how their members are appointed.
This being said, what the House of Lords can do has been restricted over the years as power shifted to the House of Commons, so the impact it has on legislation in the big picture is fairly benign.
If the body they are replacing it with will continue to hold the same power, that is fine enough.
Though on a side note, the only place the Communist Party of Great Britain ever managed to get a seat was in the House of Lords, because one of their members had a connection to a family.
yay!
The only thing I'm going to miss from the house of lords is that strange ceremony they have where a member of the house of commons walks up to the doors of the house of lords and they slam the door in his/her face. -for some reason... i think it has something to do with passing/rejecting very important bills.
I thought it was a practical joke by the bbc when i first saw it.
This sounds like a bad idea.
Once you get rid of it the queen is next and we eventually are reduced to a bunch of glue sniffers in a retarded building built by a man called Jerry for 800 billion pounds.
[QUOTE=smurfy;20742661]The monarchy is unlikely to be scrapped any time soon because it brings in a lot of tourists, is central to our international image and has no real political power any more.[/QUOTE]
ha, the funny thing is that the monarchy always makes me look down on your government. There's still some rich bitch that gets a shitload of money just for being born to the royal family.
[QUOTE=SomeRandomGuy18;20753666]ha, the funny thing is that the monarchy always makes me look down on your government. There's still some rich bitch that gets a shitload of money just for being born to the royal family.[/QUOTE]
One guys opinion =/= everyone else's.
[QUOTE=SirDigby;20739968]This is a really bad idea, the house of lords is there to keep check of the house of commons, and to stop the government putting through retarded laws.[/QUOTE]
Why can't an elected body do this?
[QUOTE=Cypher_09;20741387]Appointed by the Queen and the Prime-Minister. It's not like they are randomly picked idiots off the street.
Tradition is tradition nonetheless, and we hardly have any left.[/QUOTE]
Keeping tradition for tradition's sake is stupid.
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.
