Comments on: House of Lords Reform http://downingstreetsays.com/briefings/2004/02/09/192 Every day the Prime Minister's Spokesman meets a small coterie of political journalists known as 'the lobby' for a topical chat, or 'briefing'. Sat, 22 Nov 2008 04:24:52 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.2.2 By: Mike Haseler http://downingstreetsays.com/briefings/2004/02/09/192#comment-350 Mike Haseler Wed, 10 Mar 2004 11:31:17 +0000 http://downingstreetsays.com/briefings/2004/02/09/192#comment-350 Indirect elections won't work because they more likely than direct elections to undermine the legitimacy of the commons unless it also changes its voting. Huge numbers of people are unlikely to get the MP they want or they will get them whatever they do. So they will be voting for the second chamber. What is intended to maintain the primacy of the commons and its mandate will in fact split the mandate and undermine the legitimacy of the commons. Indeed over time, given the interest provided by the uncertainty of coalitions, it is possible that the second chamber would become the main focus of the elections and it could legitimately say: "The people voted for us; we are the democratically legitimate chamber and the commons should not obstruct the democratic will of the people." There a number of good proposals for "democratic appointments". The simplest is to ask a citizen's jury to appoint the new senators, alternatively each region could elect someone for the panel. These proposals retain the best aspects of the present Lords, and add enough democracy to make them democratically legitimate enough to carry out the work of scrutinising bills without any question of a democratic mandate. Indirect elections won’t work because they more likely than direct elections to undermine the legitimacy of the commons unless it also changes its voting.

Huge numbers of people are unlikely to get the MP they want or they will get them whatever they do. So they will be voting for the second chamber.

What is intended to maintain the primacy of the commons and its mandate will in fact split the mandate and undermine the legitimacy of the commons. Indeed over time, given the interest provided by the uncertainty of coalitions, it is possible that the second chamber would become the main focus of the elections and it could legitimately say:

"The people voted for us; we are the democratically legitimate chamber and the commons should not obstruct the democratic will of the people."

There a number of good proposals for "democratic appointments". The simplest is to ask a citizen’s jury to appoint the new senators, alternatively each region could elect someone for the panel.

These proposals retain the best aspects of the present Lords, and add enough democracy to make them democratically legitimate enough to carry out the work of scrutinising bills without any question of a democratic mandate.

]]>