Monday, June 18, 2007

Appointed Lords = No checks and balances

Blair wants to see an all appointed upper house:

BBC NEWS | Politics | Blair still backs appointed Lords

What a terrible idea. The party machine has control over the lower house with most decision making and debating happening behind closed doors among party members. An appointed house would hand the whole legislative engine to said party system.

The Lords is not perfect by any means, but I like the existing Lords because it brings together people, albeit mostly very privileged people, who are largely independent and who bring along their own view of the world, not the cookie-cutter party line.

I'm sure the Lords will change over time but but I do hope it retains it's ability to act as a real check and balance to the lower house. An appointed House of Lords would completely fail to do that.

No comments: