Comments:UK government plans to replace House of Lords with elected chamber

Back to article

This page is for commentary on the news. If you wish to point out a problem in the article (e.g. factual error, etc), please use its regular collaboration page instead. Comments on this page do not need to adhere to the Neutral Point of View policy. Please remain on topic and avoid offensive or inflammatory comments where possible. Try thought-provoking, insightful, or controversial. Civil discussion and polite sparring make our comments pages a fun and friendly place. Please think of this when posting.

Use the "Start a new discussion" button just below to start a new discussion. If the button isn't there, wait a few seconds and click this link: Refresh.

I think the government should stop trying to improve things, and instead sit on their hands.

They might also be interested in visiting http://www.fixcongressfirst.org/ and reading that first!

...and what's relevant about that, exactly?

In fact we should not only get rid of the House of Lords, but we should kick Old Liz out of her glided throne and put a president in her place. I'm all for ending the last vestiges of the accursed monarchy that has caused much trouble for the world.

Yeah, I'm not seeing how the monarchy is causing any problems currently. They have no actual power, don't leech off any money from the government and as proven during the war, can have a positive effect when the going gets tough. I'm assuming by 'president', you were referring to the kind that other countries like France and Germany have and honestly, isn't it kind of pointless to remove one figurehead and replace it with another, even if the latter is a elected one?

I do however agree with getting rid of the House of Lords, since its utterly useless compared to the Commons.

I'm having trouble thinking of any trouble caused by the current monarch. Don't get me wrong, being constantly encouraged to recycle if Charles takes the throne'll be vaguely annoying but still...

I'm just someone who looks back at history. Plus, I grew up in a Irish-American Irish Republician/Pro-Provos household.

The only reason this is happening is because the government sees the Lords as an impediment to its ability to pass whatever laws they want. The Lords has rejected several Draconian Labour bills over the years; an elected house would bring them under complete control of the whips without all that scandalous cash-for-peerages nonsense.

Patrick has yet to state exactly what it is that the monarchy has done, even in history (were that indeed a valid argument for overthrowing them today), that is so vile; and that last comment doesn't seem to make any sense - 'please excuse my opinions, I'm inherently biased'?

While I hold nothing personal against the British Royal Family, It does seem incredibly antiquated for a state that purports to be a democracy to maintain vestiges of a system which is clearly undemocratic. By lavishly furnishing a lifetime position which is inherited, it only serves to undermine the credibility of the United Kingdom to the rest of the world. Frankly it is quite embarrassing for a modern state to hold on to such a frivolous pursuit, especially in light of the very real possibility of Scotland becoming an independent republic in the next 25 years.