HoLords reform hits the skids

[amateur51]

Plans to reform the House of Lords are being abandoned after Conservatives "broke the coalition contract", Lib Dem leader Nick Clegg has announced. Agreement on an elected Lords could not be reached with Tory opponents, he said, and the plans would be shelved rather than face a "slow death".

As a result, he said Lib Dem MPs could not now support Conservative-driven changes to Commons boundaries in 2015.

Jacob Rees-Mogg has spiced things up by pointing out that if all the Lib-Dem ministers voted against the boundary proposals they would be required to resign, which would mean the end of the coalition because there would no longer be a parliamentary majority and so there'd be a General Election. Poor Nick!

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-19149212

[Flosshilde]

And the good news is -

Lib Dem MPs could not now support Conservative-driven changes to Commons boundaries in 2015.

[Lateralthinking1]

The breaking of contracts is a Conservative speciality, particularly in regard to pensions. When they do it, it is acting in a responsible manner on behalf of all the country. When anyone else does as an equal response, it is a sign of immaturity.

Penny Mordaunt MP, a new name to me, ranted on PM tonight, criticising the Lib Dems for being childish (twice) and not a dult. Odd pronunciation but then she was Head of Foreign Press for George W. Bush's presidential campaign in 2000 and worked for the Bush campaign again in 2004.

Nadine Dorries on LBC was on similar lines except that she appeared to call for an immediate election with Boris Johnson installed beforehand as Tory leader. Johnson had told James Whale earlier that he had no intention of stepping down as Mayor. On hearing that, the former expressed horror that, quote, "UKIP could sweep the board". Quite what that meant she didn't say.

The Conservatives' argument appears to be that Clegg has suddenly chosen to link Lords reform with boundary changes. In April, he did say that they were separate issues. Everyone is in agreement that originally the latter were linked more closely to AV. I find it then bizarre that they should have proceeded to draft them when AV fell. Probably they are all wrong.

[Flosshilde]

The Conservatives' argument appears to be that Clegg has suddenly chosen to link Lords reform with boundary changes. In April, he did say that they were separate issues. Everyone is in agreement that originally the latter were linked more closely to AV. I find it then bizarre that they should have proceeded to draft them when AV fell. Probably they are all wrong.

My understanding (which could be wrong) is that the constitutional reform - Lords & proportional representation - was offered to the LibDems by the Tories in exchange for support for boundary changes (which could be regarded as gerrymandering) & reducing the number of MPs. As Cameron has withdrawn from Lords reform, & arguably scuppered PR, it seems reasonable for the LibDems to withdraw support for the boundary changes.

[amateur51]

My understanding (which could be wrong) is that the constitutional reform - Lords & proportional representation - was offered to the LibDems by the Tories in exchange for support for boundary changes (which could be regarded as gerrymandering) & reducing the number of MPs. As Cameron has withdrawn from Lords reform, & arguably scuppered PR, it seems reasonable for the LibDems to withdraw support for the boundary changes.

Such scampery so late at night, Floss

[french frank]

(which could be regarded as gerrymandering

Only by the Labour party which has long benefited from the fact that many inner city constituencies which return a Labour MP have relatively very small numbers of voters.

The indignation therefore comes from Labour, crying, "How dare you abolish our rotten boroughs!"

[Flosshilde]

Such scampery so late at night, Floss

Oh, I can do scampery at any time of day or night, ams

[Richard Tarleton]

Does anyone think this particular solution to the HoL problem was a good one? 15 year terms and lists drawn up by the political parties locally sounds pretty rum to me, if anything worse than the current situation.

[amateur51]

Only by the Labour party which has long benefited from the fact that many inner city constituencies which return a Labour MP have relatively very small numbers of voters.

The indignation therefore comes from Labour, crying, "How dare you abolish our rotten boroughs!"

Such sour grapes so early in the day

Face it, french frank it's rank bad behaviour (on all sides)

[french frank]

Such sour grapes so early in the day

There is a political point: the boundaries currently favour the Labour party, against the Tories. The Tories' legislation wanted to change that. Natch.

Not sure where the concept of 'sour grapes' comes into it Oh, yes I have! It's Labour sour grapes, isn't it!

That said, having not even managed to get PR on the ballot paper, and now losing Lords reform (not to mention You Know What) - time for a divorce, I think. Clegg not nearly tough enough for the job.

[amateur51]

There is a political point: the boundaries currently favour the Labour party, against the Tories. The Tories' legislation wanted to change that. Natch.

Not sure where the concept of 'sour grapes' comes into it Oh, yes I have! It's Labour sour grapes, isn't it!

That said, having not even managed to get PR on the ballot paper, and now losing Lords reform (not to mention You Know What) - time for a divorce, I think. Clegg not nearly tough enough for the job.

The sour grapes refer to your sudden attack on Labour, french frank - like the parent bird running away from her nest pretending to have a broken wing to distract would-be predators

As I said this is rank bad behaviour by politicians on all sides and it once again throws light on the quality of people whose only life experience is politics. Parliament is full of them.

And the voting public are constantly chastised for being apathetic because they can't bring themselves to vote for a such a bunch of second-rate self-servers.

Truly a pathetic disgrace

[Flosshilde]

Only by the Labour party which has long benefited from the fact that many inner city constituencies which return a Labour MP have relatively very small numbers of voters.

True, there are some constituencies that return Labour consistently, but I don't think enough to give Labour an automatic majority (in fact since 1945, not including the last, indecisive, election, Labour and Conservative have won the same number of general elections - 9 each http://www.politicsresources.net/area/uk/uktable.htm). The proposed changes will, it is confidently predicted, give Tories an in-built majority.

The indignation therefore comes from Labour, crying, "How dare you abolish our rotten boroughs!"

I thought the LibDems were pretty indignant too, or are they jealous that there isn't any way on Earth that will put them anywhere near a majority - in-built or not? Good grief, ff, I'm supporting the LibDem position on this - don't look a gift horse in the mouth

[french frank]

The sour grapes refer to your sudden attack on Labour, french frank

Is this a diversionary tactic? Sudden attack on Labour? On this point there is a flaw in their position. I'm simply pointing that out, while you've ignored the central point - twice! . The thread is specifically about constitutional reform: about the reform of the Lords and as a related matter the redrawing of constituency boundaries. I am not personally involved in either, and my grapes, sour or otherwise, are irrelevant!

Nor, as I see it, is this principally a matter of politicians' 'behaviour' - when were they ever gentlemen?

Do you have political opinions? What are your views on a) the reform of the House of Lords and b) the redrawing of parliamentary boundaries?

[amateur51]

Is this a diversionary tactic? Sudden attack on Labour? On this point there is a flaw in their position. I'm simply pointing that out, while you've ignored the central point - twice! . The thread is specifically about constitutional reform: about the reform of the Lords and as a related matter the redrawing of constituency boundaries. I am not personally involved in either, and my grapes, sour or otherwise, are irrelevant!

Nor, as I see it, is this principally a matter of politicians' 'behaviour' - when were they ever gentlemen?

Do you have political opinions? What are your views on a) the reform of the House of Lords and b) the redrawing of parliamentary boundaries?

The reform of the House of Lords is a long overdue necessity and Clegg's proposal was a mess and unworkable [So was Blair's which barely existed - see Robin Cook's memoirs for the full story]. How long has Clegg been working at it?

The redrawing of parliamentary boundaries is a distraction at the present time. The West Lothian question is far more urgent

These days 'politics' is synonymous with politicians' 'behaviour'

[Flosshilde]

Is this a diversionary tactic? Sudden attack on Labour? On this point there is a flaw in their position.

No, there isn't, as I've pointed out above. They also criticised the Tories' proposals on several grounds, not just the gerrymandering one. The fact that the 'court of appeal' is being ditched, so that it will be extremely difficult to challenge boundary changes in the future. The fact that new boundaries will cross 'natural' borders (isn't the West Country - a libdem stronghold? - a case in point?). The fact that many Scottish constituencies would be unworkable because of the extreme distances to be covered by the MP.

Do you have political opinions? What are your views on a) the reform of the House of Lords and b) the redrawing of parliamentary boundaries?

a) Very neccessary, but not in the form provided. 15 year terms too long, for example - or at least, not have the whole lot elected for 15 years at the same time, but 1 third elected every 5 years, at the same time as the Commons.

b) Possibly neccessary to allow for population changes, but done by a committee of MPs from all parties & representation from other groups (including parties without MPs)