---

Wintonsweek
Appointed, Hereditary House Of Lords Shames Britain
Scandal Not The Buying Of Peerages, But Lack Of Democracy
Why Should Kinnock, Steel, Prior, Williams Still Spout, Vote For Us?
Britain Demands A Senate, Voted By The People, No More, No Less

     “Membership of the upper chamber would be for one, 5-year term only. Pay would be limited to expenses. Senators will vote on what is right, not on how the vote might facilitate their ascent up the greasy pole.” 

    The superficial mainstream British media is again guilty of missing the point, and the current scandal about corrupt neo-Labour allowing its misguided supporters to buy peerages is yet another example.

    The real outrage is the fact that Britain still has a second chamber, a crucial defender of our rights, whose members are either appointed by politicians, or owe their position to inheritance.

    No other western democracy has a system like this. Try explaining the House of Lords to the Americans. Imagine the prestige of the U.S. senate if its members were appointed by Presidents, or birthright meant you were a senator. (Some might say that Senator Edward Kennedy’s Massachusetts seat was the result of some kind of inheritance, but no system is perfect.)

    Tyranny of the majority
    I’m assuming that most people will want a second chamber of some kind to mitigate the tyranny of the majority that we currently see, with the obnoxious, fascist Labour regime abusing our democratic traditions and spitting in the face of Parliament. Even a corrupt 2^nd chamber has put some roadblocks in neo-Labour’s path. Don’t bank on that lasting for ever.

    But Britain’s modernised (I hesitate to use a word which has been rendered meaningless by the Blair regime) second chamber will end a ludicrous situation which makes British subjects look like childish victims of some out-dated, feudal, class system.

    Intellectually and morally corrupt
    Of course the Labour party said it wanted to reform the House of Lords. But don’t look at what they say, look at what they do, to paraphrase Charles Colson of former President Nixon fame. Unfortunately, the class warriors of Labour had no idea what do, save the destructive part of kicking out most of the hereditary members. That must have been fun for the union hacks and second rate college lecturers in the people’s party. But being an intellectually and morally corrupt institution, Labour quickly realised that reforming the Lords and modernising, to coin a phrase, our democracy, would take away huge patronage powers from the prime minister, and retirement jobs for the boys. That’s why Labour has failed to act, and never will. Labour only cares about power and cementing it for its own use.

    May I suggest a reform for the House of Lords which would make it properly democratic, and stand a chance of taking the power of the political parties out of the second chamber.

    One term only, 5 years
    Membership of the upper chamber would be for one, 5-year term only. Pay would be limited to expenses only. This would make sure that membership of the Lords – let’s call it the Senate – would provide no route for political advancement, and would be filled by members who would probably be retired and have a lifetime of experience to bring to the country’s decision making process. The short-term nature of the tenure would mean that whips would have less power than they do in the House of Commons. Senators are likely to vote on what they think is right, not on how the vote might facilitate their ascent up the greasy pole.

    The vote every 5 years would be on the French system where successful candidates would have to attain at least 50% of the vote. This means that a run-off would probably have to take place with the top 2 candidates. That would avoid the lunacy of a Ken Livingstone winning the London mayoralty although more people voted against him than supported him.

    “Lord” Kinnock
    If you are not ready to countenance such a radical reform, just think of those useless, bought no-hopers from all political parties who pollute the Lords. “Lord” Kinnock, fresh from gouging huge tax-free sums from our European “partners” as a commissioner in Brussels, is now part of our democratic political process. His views count. He can vote in Parliament, and yet nobody has voted for him for about 20 years.

    The House of Lords is packed with the likes of Kinnock. Failures and fools like Geoff Rooker, Lord Rooker now, Lord Bassam of Brighton and the egregious Baroness Amos. On the Conservative side, why should a hand-wringer and political coward like Lord Jim Prior still have constitutional power over us?

    Poisonous, counterproductive
    Baroness Shirley Williams was rejected by voters in the 60s but is still lording it over us. She must be on BBCTV or Radio every week still, pushing her poisonous and counterproductive views on education, which would deny world-class standards to the poor of Britain. Williams of course lived off the fat of the land as a child, and was able to get the best education money could buy. Pull up the ladder Jack, I’m all right. The abortionist Lord Steele is still propounding his moral-free zone views, and being transported every week from his outpost in Scotland, first class, courtesy of the tax-payers, naturally.

    Of course the fact that Labour is willing to ignore the spirit of Blair’s own legislation which claimed to want to make donations to political parties transparent and honest is outrageous. But the limp-wristed response of the Tories, complicit in this system and also unwilling to reform, does us voters no favours. Yes, the Tories were guilty of sleaze during their reign, but Labour’s transgressions are of a much higher order and reflect a serial policy to abuse the law.

    Will the scales fall from British eyes?
    If the British can bite the bullet and finally demand reform of the House of Lords, there is hope yet for the country. Who knows, one day we will wake up and demand that other sacred cows, often serially useless deliverers of services and trashers of standards, are no longer tolerated.

    Imagine the scales falling from British eyes as the overbearing BBC monopoly is privatised, the National Health Service is seen as an outdated institution of a time of deference, where services were doled out like alms by our elders and betters. One day maybe parents will awake from their blinkered slumber and say “just why does the government run education?”

    Don’t hold your breadth. Sensible, far-reaching reform doesn’t seem possible in Britain.

 Neil Winton – March 20, 2006

Top