Does anybody know about the House of Lords?
•
by Christophia
Although currently residing in Romania, I have been keeping up to date with affairs in eUK, and with particular interest, in the current debate over the House of Lords. Now I know I can't speak for everyone else, but I don't think it would be too unfair to suggest that very few people in eUK know that a) it even exists and b) what the point of it is.
The House of Lords is a body established a few months ago now as a second parliamentary chamber. Much like in real-life, proposals from the House of Commons are sent to the House of Lords after Commons approval for checking, editing, changing, improving etc. The Lords can then reject the legislation.
But what is the Lords, I hear you ask? Well its a body of 12 citizens, who are nearly all e😜
oliticians or citizens of experience and knowledge. They are not elected in any manner, but merely appointed by the Prime Minister (President) with the approval of the Party President of only the largest three parties by membership. This means the United Belgian Party which was elected into the British Congress with 14% of the vote is not given a voice, and the Movement for Democratic Unity, which was elected by the people of eUK with 10% of the vote, is not given a voice. This means the House of Lords does not represent nearly a quarter of the British public. In fact, Yorkshire and Humberside, which is purely represented by the MDU, is not given a voice AT ALL.
Now, I'm sorry, but how utterly ridiculous is this? It is fact that the vast proportion of members of UK Reform, the People's Communist Party and (to a lesser extent) The Unity Party are inactive. How then can it be justified that only the biggest 3 have exclusive rights?
Dishmcds, ex-Prime Minister of eUK who is now a member of the Lords, said the "Lords isnt supposed to be 'democratically fair' or elected". In his usual manner of refusing to engage in proper debate without accusing the opposition of something, Dishmcds then stated that there was no point of Tommy Tomassino, MDU Party President, being part of eUK because he couldn't accept that the MDU Party President did not have equal standing in the Lords. After then stating that UKRP had 400+ members, Tommy challenged him to find more than 60 active members, to which Dishmcds promptly and conveniently ignored.
There is a point to the Lords - it is a body of the most experienced and knowledgeable members of eUK that can advise the House of Commons on legislation in order to improve it and make sure it is the best it can be. But as CV James, ex MDU Party President has put it, is it right that this body is completely unelected, undemocratic and unrepresentative of the people, yet it has the power to change laws affecting us all? He proposes the body becomes smaller and provides non-binding advice, which in reality the Commons would probably always accept.
However, the debate and the emotions grow, who knows where this will take us...
You can read the debate on the Lords here:
http://forums.erepublik.co.uk/viewtopic.php?f=42&t=620
___________________
Loved it? Please vote so others can see and subscribe to receive updates
Enraged by it? Why not comment below with your thoughts
Facebook
Twitter
Discord
Comments
Lets just make something clear from the start tho, a member of any UK party no matter of its size can be in the HoL. Imyself am in MDU and a Lord.
The argument is meerly over the fact that the list of Lords doesnt need the approval of any party outside the top 3.
I'll just repeat what was said on the forums, for those who don't read them.
1) The point of the HoL is to provide older, often less active eUK citizens who have made noteworthy contributions to the eUK a way to still contribute to politics. As such, it is assumed that party politics shouldn't matter.
2) The whole of Y&H hasn't lost their voice on the matter. The 11 people who were actually active enough to take the time to vote for either of the MDU candidates have. 11 divided by 3700 as a percent is 0.29, therefore, less than a third of a percent of people lack a voice because of the MDU not being included.
3) There is only one MDU lord, and isn't that only because he switched from another party? In my opinion, until we see someone who is an MDU member before becoming a lord become a lord, they don't need to be involved.
4) There are a variety of ways the HoC and the PM can veto the HoL. so in a way, it's only there to guide. if either the HoC or the PM don't agree with the lords, they can veto them, and the legislation passes. it's just another check in the system.
Don't take this as a slight against the MDU, I just think you guys are still a new party. get more established, prove that you can last, and then they'll let you in on the HoL, if you really want to 😛
Intrepid
1. once elected a congressman represents the region and should work for the region, not just the people who voted for them.
2. such a small change is required, that we are wondering why they are so opposed to it. criticism of the lords in general is that it's elitist and undemocratic. this is only proving the case.
3. the 'big three' is a completely artificial thing. by the nature of eRepublik there is a 'big 5'. the people who started the house of the lords (who are also lords themselves) articifically created a big 3, cutting out two parties which by the nature of eRepublik allows to run for congress seats. its extremely elitist. Whether it makes no difference in reality at all, it is more the principal of making this detached group.
I was actually in MDU when i was apointed a Lordbut that is irrelevant.
sorry bout that BBB, I actually thought it was Bremer who was the lord, before he moved to Switzerland.
It may make no difference one way or another if they get added, so why not add then for continuities sake? All our other legislation requires 'Big 5' involvement, so why not this? I don't understand why people are so against it that they actively keep MDU and UBP off the list. Personally, the it doesn't bother me one way or the other, but I do feel it is a little discriminatory to deny the MDU this. Surely all 5 parties should be entitled to equal rights, after all, we fight so hard for the Small Parties rights.
Thanks for the comments - i would reply to points made but Tommy has already done so and I completely agree with what he's said.
I did not write this to further the MDU - I complete support the UBP in this too, but seeing as though they have not taken a stance on the matter I cannot report their views.
Noone from MDU has proposed an amendment...
All you have to do is change the word "big-3" to "big-5". Its hardly worth it while we're still debating the principle.
Exactly.
And besides - this is coming from an independent. It is not just the MDU who are against the current system - i'll think you'll find many in eUK think its questionable.
peasants revolt!
i have a House of Lords amendment in the pipeline 😛
I thought you were going to do some decent reporting? The discussion is about: Tommy wanting to be able to have a say whether or not a candidate lord gets in the HoL. MDU is represented in the HoL as they have a Lord, but the HoL isn't party affiliated so it doesn't matter from which party someone is when he enters the HoL. It is for the old and wise (ahum) to advise commons on the laws they propose.
whose organization is that?
'This means the House of Lords does not represent nearly a quarter of the British public. In fact, Yorkshire and Humberside, which is purely represented by the MDU, is not given a voice AT ALL.'
Isn't this the same group of people who were trying to stop the HoL being party affiliated and now you're making a huge fuss because your PARTY isn't represented.
Sounds like a little kid moaning because they're not invited to a bday party but the day before moaning they should be banned.
Nope its not the "same group of people" is it. I'm not the MDU am I.
Thanks for not only misquoting me, but you said things I didnt.
I never told Tommy to leave. I SAID that if we cannot trust the PP's of the largest three parties (which represent 1000 citizens in the UK) AND the PM, then there really isnt a point to being in the eUK, is there?
Next time, much like your last article, pull your head out and represent what is ACTUALLY said.
If everything is given to everyone, those who don't have something have no reason to work harder to reach a goal.
I think the Lords should be left as it is. Rule eBrittania!
HoL has nothing to do with party, it's just a selection of former presidents, former ministers and ppl who have shown great commitment to this country.
Many of them still want to be involved in the politics but as they've been playing so long, they also have allot of strength and are great as soldiers in battle. As a congressman they can't leave the country but as a lord they can.
this way we still have experienced ppl in our politics as well as supersoldiers in our battles.
i disagree with your entire article 🙂