Jump to content

Peers to be Removed Next Year.


TIGHTCHOKE
 Share

Recommended Posts

10 hours ago, TIGHTCHOKE said:

Well, I feel that the "upper house" needs to be thinned out and "hereditary" peers should go.

I would like people to be in there who have some life experience, some business acumen and possibly even better records kept of their actual attendance and voting.

It really is an "old boys club", achieves very little and needs "streamlining".

At last some common sense. You might not like Starmer but he is making progress. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 21/09/2024 at 09:52, enfieldspares said:

Fact is when push came to shove in 1988 with Thatcher's self-loading rifle ban and in 1996 with John Major's pistol ban these hereditary peers in a then pre-Blair reform House of Lords could have stopped both measures. They didn't. So all this Telegraph "guff" about protecting the people against the tyranny of bad law passed by the House of Commons is just "hot air". Not about "us" but about merely preserving their comfortable grift.

Correct. 

Keep the good times rolling.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, oowee said:

At last some common sense. You might not like Starmer but he is making progress. 

Oowee, there is a great deal of COMMON SENSE here in PW.

It is you that blindly champion Starmer that needs to look inwards.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 minutes ago, TIGHTCHOKE said:

Oowee, there is a great deal of COMMON SENSE here in PW.

It is you that blindly champion Starmer that needs to look inwards.

the commons sense that kept saying you have to vote as it brings change well the genius clan voted it brought change and boy are they crying now while star boy is rat barrel material he crushed the riots found the guilty swiftly and gave out long prison terms not bad going for a idiot! 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 hours ago, oowee said:

At last some common sense. You might not like Starmer but he is making progress. 

All he is doing is to try and reduce the gap between the tories and labour, he doesn't care about anything else he just wants more labour leverage, it is very much like the labour stranglehold in wales, they introduce voting for 16 yr olds who will historically vote for labour, now they are creating 30+ new seats knowing the odds will be better stacked in their favour and then there will be no voting for an individual ,only parties will be listed on ballot papers.

Labour really are a sneaky authoritarian party.

And if you call being nasty to the most vulnerable in society as winter approches, while taking bungs, sorry donations from millionares,and giving out passes to access the centre of government, and accepting lots of freebies from people like the FA while you are supposed to be reforming how they operate.
Oh he is making great progress:lol:



https://members.parliament.uk/parties/Lords

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, welsh1 said:

All he is doing is to try and reduce the gap between the tories and labour, he doesn't care about anything else he just wants more labour leverage

Even the Express reported the work of the newly created Border and Security Commander. Making a difference 👍

https://www.express.co.uk/news/politics/1951841/Smuggler-migrants-Ireland-arrested

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, oowee said:

Even the Express reported the work of the newly created Border and Security Commander. Making a difference 👍

https://www.express.co.uk/news/politics/1951841/Smuggler-migrants-Ireland-arrested

Just because there is a new figure head doesn't mean they were behind it .
I have friends who work for border force, things like this are the result of long term operations and intelligence.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

35 minutes ago, welsh1 said:

Just because there is a new figure head doesn't mean they were behind it .
I have friends who work for border force, things like this are the result of long term operations and intelligence.

No, no, no, all the good stuff happens immediately the new guy takes his post...............................in Oowees world.   :cool1:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, welsh1 said:

Just because there is a new figure head doesn't mean they were behind it .
I have friends who work for border force, things like this are the result of long term operations and intelligence.

 

Ahh yes i would think so. Blame and praise work both ways and given everything was Starmers fault I thought we should point out some good stuff. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, oowee said:

I could have guessed you would favour hereditary privilege. 

I don't, but then I don't favour political grift and Trade Union privilege either. 

Any grouping that takes from the least well off who can't fight back  to give massive pay rises to the relatively well off can not be supported.  Any pensioner from private industry will most likely be well off only if they have saved massively, no cushy state funded, index linked, public services final salary pension for them.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, JohnfromUK said:

At least they have free ermine trimmed robes not free suits

The difference is the enlightened recognise that all sides of the political spectrum have strengths and weakness. Unfortunately for many on here everything in the centre is bad and everything to the right is good. Hence the love fest for Boris and then for Trump both have which are proven disasters. 😁

Kier should put in place a clothing and attendance allowance for PM? 

1 minute ago, Yellow Bear said:

I don't, but then I don't favour political grift and Trade Union privilege either. 

Any grouping that takes from the least well off who can't fight back  to give massive pay rises to the relatively well off can not be supported.  Any pensioner from private industry will most likely be well off only if they have saved massively, no cushy state funded, index linked, public services final salary pension for them.

Ah I thought you were suggesting there were no benefits from Starmer being in power. Clearly your previous post to suggest there were no benefits was wrong. 

I cannot support the communist approach suggested in your second paragraph. The free market has served this country well. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, oowee said:

Kier should put in place a clothing and attendance allowance for PM?

Or perhaps they should pay for their office clothing out of taxed income like anyone else who works in an office.  If he needs special uniform, special protective clothing, a uniform, then the job should provide - but a business suit or three - get your own and don't expect others to pay for it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, JohnfromUK said:

Or perhaps they should pay for their office clothing out of taxed income like anyone else who works in an office.  If he needs special uniform, special protective clothing, a uniform, then the job should provide - but a business suit or three - get your own and don't expect others to pay for it.

Why? Is the role of PM the same as every other job? Can the PM buy gear from China to represent the UK? When did you last but a UK made suit? They are not cheap. 

I think we want our PM, our ambassador dressed in the best the UK can offer. I don't think it's fair to expect the PM to pay for that (the salary is simply not enough). 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 minutes ago, oowee said:

Why? Is the role of PM the same as every other job? Can the PM buy gear from China to represent the UK? When did you last but a UK made suit? They are not cheap. 

I think we want our PM, our ambassador dressed in the best the UK can offer. I don't think it's fair to expect the PM to pay for that (the salary is simply not enough). 

As a matter of fact, all my business suits were UK made and usually sourced from a (now long gone) tailor in Cheltenham.  British wool - and not cheap.  After I retired, the moths feasted on them.  The exception was a linen suit for hot weather - and it was a pig to keep crease free.   My shooting suit was tailor made in Scotland of Scottish tweed.

The PM - or any other non uniformed people should source their own clothing out of their taxed income - same as anyone else.  If he wants to buy Chinese (or Indian, or wherever) thats his choice.

Edit: I note that the tailors shop has gone (2013), but they are still in business.  The shop was the last one I remember to use a Lamson Tube payment system with a central cash office.  https://www.thefamous1886.com/

Edited by JohnfromUK
Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, oowee said:

I cannot support the communist approach suggested in your second paragraph. The free market has served this country well. 

It is not a communist approach to object to robbing the poorer to fund large state employed trade unions excessive pay claims and finance more state handouts overseas.  If it was free market in these areas improved productivity and efficiency would be required to finance the claim.

As others have said you seem to live in another world.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

23 minutes ago, Yellow Bear said:

It is not a communist approach to object to robbing the poorer to fund large state employed trade unions excessive pay claims and finance more state handouts overseas.  If it was free market in these areas improved productivity and efficiency would be required to finance the claim.

As others have said you seem to live in another world.

In a capitalist world market forces rule don't you think? I guess some want one rule for some and another rule for others.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, oowee said:

In a capitalist world market forces rule don't you think? I guess some want one rule for some and another rule for others.

Correct  if they are allowed to. -  however in your world and using the communist analogy, they have taken from the less well off proletariat to increase funding to the, already relatively well off, party members.

They could have removed child benefit to those on over basic rate tax and gained a lot more.  But a lot of those in the public services are "party members" by default by being union members, and you can't treat them that way.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...