When it appears there is no difference in whomever you vote for, there is no point. This is where parties, such as the BNP, are picking up votes. The Labour Party is viewed now as very “middle class” and a world away from the realities of working class, they have lost touch with the masses.

Politicians in general are now viewed in a very derisory way by those at the bottom of the ladder. The expenses scandal has only seemed to harden the view that they are only there to line their own pockets.

From the man in the streets point of view what difference is there ?

He`s worried about his kids getting a home of their own without having to get pregnant at an early age to get a Council house.

He knows the hospitals are not fit for purpose.

He see`s the immigrants, sometimes illegally, taking jobs for less money and getting the housing.

He see`s year after year his freedom eroded by Nanny state.

Even the Police, and this comes from an inside source, have had their job made so difficult and constantly see things thrown back at them by the press and courts are only in it for the wage packet now.

To the average man there is no blue,red and orange it`s all grey. All suits just out for themselves.

Don`t just spend your life in political circles, go out there and I don`t mean do things that are arranged, you`ll only get an arranged view. Don`t just speak to your party membership, they`ll give you a party view.

When the truth is told it`s not the electorate who are apathetic it`s the Politicians who are apathetic to the electorate.

Don`t knock on doors and give them YOUR view, ask them THEIRS !

Germany’s population grew from just under 2 million in 1870 to just over 5 millions in 1910 whilst the UK population over the same period grew from 3 million to 4 millions. The ballooning German population reflected its prosperity but it presented enormous problems for the German exchequer especially after it embarked upon its welfare state.

If you were a known socialist you got no welfare from the German state, in fact one could argue that the persecution of the radical left in Germany provided a fertile breeding ground for the far right something that would not bode well for a future Germany.

These socialist radicals ended up in England where they had a lush ground in which to grow and influence the politics of socialism. The Liberals at this time were a collection of disgruntled Tories, Peelites and Whigs in search of a popular political identity and mandate.

Bismarck died July 30, 1898 and Wilhelm II free of Bismarck’s influence was given free reign. A still rising population meant the pressures on the exchequer remained unabated. Germany did, what they would do later, and expanded their military machine which meant jobs, taxes and a content political class.

The HoL at this time was aware of Germany’s military build up and many wanted to rearm our military but it was no match for German spending power. The choice faced by the HoL in 1911 was rearmament or a welfare state. The Monarchy was leveraged and the welfare state won the day. The government went into denial of the German threat and Britain was ill prepared to face the German military in 1914.

Democracy since 1911 has had a clear mandate, improve the lot of ordinary people and make for a fairer society. All over Europe the story has been about this journey but now the prosperity train has arrived but politicians have failed to realise that it has stopped. This is the nub of our political problems in Europe.

In 1893 Bismarck gave a warning:

“My fear and anxiety for the future is that the national idea may be stifled in the coils of a boa constrictor of bureaucracy, which has grown rapidly in the last few years.” Castle Friedrichsruhe, July 9, 1893. See PDF in link.

The HoL is the most cost effective second chamber in Europe. The phrase: “Politics is the art of the possible” (“Die Politik ist die Lehre von Möglichen”) came from the lips of Bismarck on August 11, 1867. Many in politics that have used the phrase are wrongly attributed with originating it.

Ref: German Empire: Bismarck’s Era
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/German_Empire
Prince Bismarck’s Warning: NY Times, July 10, 1893
http://query.nytimes.com/gst/abstract.html?res=9D02E5DC103BEF33A25753C1A9619C94629ED7CF
Population History
http://www.tacitus.nu/historical-atlas/population/

The basis for saying that XBench is often far right, is about Independence from parish council onwards and upwards. Membership of party conveys a kind of good sense which Independents in district or county council rarely have; there are very few Independents who show any resemblance at all to socialism, and plenty who do to reactionary conservatism! (Please don’t ask me who!)

Ok so the political position structure of HofL is organised on ad hoc basis but if we all face the crown like that, we would have a
Russian format for our second parliamentary chamber, a confrontational one with a supreme being, in their case a president.

What if they all insisted on cramming in to the one Xbench?!

Two laws good, 4 laws better perhaps?

The Lords must be reformed independently of the Executive or a majority of the legislature in the other house. Perhaps the best way would possibly be to reverse procedures for once. For the HoL to put forward a Bill for reform to the Commons ?

Such an enormous constitutional upheaval MUST NOT be done by any one parliament, the winning party having put Lords reform in the small print of its manifesto. (As what happened in 1999*).

At a time when the Executive is so unaccountable to the legislature and the public I don’t really see Lords reform as the priority. In fact, I actually think it’s dangerous. Let’s get the Commons in order first by cutting the number of government payrolled members (ie, ministers) and letting the Commons decide its own timetable for debates and bills. When we finally have a Commons that can stand up to the Executive then, and only then, should the issue of Lords reform be addressed.

*For anyone interested, “The Lords’ Tale” (about the removal of the hereditaries) is on youtube.

Gar: Since a treaty committee will in the commons crudely represent the balance of the house they are rubber stamps for the governing party and won’t ‘amend’ the treaty. If the Lords were to ‘amend’ it then the government would use its majority and ultimately the parliament act to overturn it.

Defence Minister tries to obtain expenses of £27k for Bell tower and lead guttering.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/8404942.stm

He didn`t get it all, just £5,380 and stated that it was for roof repairs only yet the invoice states clearly Bell Tower and lead guttering. £5,380 is rather a lot just for lead guttering.

Let`s have a look at some roofing prices shall we ?

http://www.whatprice.co.uk/prices/building/roof-repair.html

Oh dear the roofer appears to have ripped off Mr. Davies…Maybe !!!

C`mon guys don`t take us for mugs. If you bring the roofer in and he states everything you say is 100% I`ll apologise.

Election now please Mr. Brown !

On the subject of representation in the Second chanber as it is now known,this would be my proportion of seats for it.

100 hereds (to be re-elected at their electoral college at general election time)

100 elected by direct mandate at General election.

75 City mayors (unitary authorities) appointed by right of mayoralty. (refinements to follow since they are usually only elected for one year)

That would be as worthy a goal to aim for as the Irvine/Falconer/Blair/Brown quartet did in 1995.

It would even be acceptable to a Conservative govt, especially when you consider that there are a good many people in the HofC who would like a unicameral Parliament.

1. An elected Lord speaker by public mandate at GE
2 An elected HofL but NOT elected City Mayors; city mayors wholly appointed.
2a) Elected Hereds in electoral coll
2b) Elected Peers for the 4-5 year term of the parliament.

Get rid of all those dodderers,who just like to live in the place because it is acomfortable and pleasant to live in.

In answer to Croft’s question about:

How does a treaty committee matter if the house will vote on party or ideological lines?

Amended clauses of Bills may entirely transform the bill itself; regarding International Law “Treaty” I am not quite certain how different countries have placed limiting conditions on their acceptance of it, but that is probably what they have done.

On a slightly different tack again, I have never been a Uni-cameral man myself. The Second chamber is there, so it might just as well be used.. there is a good case for reducing the number of Members of the HofC as well, say to 400, and spreading the load and usage between the two places. That little comment sits well with Lord Speaker’s remarks.

I have always enjoyed my contacts with the HofL Lord Chancellors,all the way back to Lord Llanelli, Elwyn Jones the junior Nurnberg prosecutor, Harold Wilson’s right hand man! Was it Lord Havers, bless ‘is departed soul under Maggie T; a very dear man indeed, although loathed by some of the Labor party I heard!