Reforming the UK Government

[johns]

Yeah well I thought I'd give you lot my views... because no-one else will listen...

1) Elect the House of Lords.
Good idea, and apart from a few jowly old gentlemen, I can't see anyone objecting really... Problems I see are that the turnout could be very low... lower than Euro elections... and how exactly would they be elected... Proportional Representation of one kind or another is the favourite I would imagine. I would suggest the STV system used up here in Scotland would be the best way to go.
Who would stand for election? Another bunch of politicians no doubt, which would mean the end of the Crossbencher/Independent... or would it.

2) PR for the Commons.
Well I'm a fan of PR for the Commons and have been for over 20 years, but the question is what system? We don't want a system that virtually eliminates minorities from getting an MP elected, which means we'll have to tolerate some nutters in the Commons too. But we don't want a system that is mega-complex too. And I'm not bothered about losing "1 MP for 1 Constituency" either. Multi-member constituencies are fine by me. I could write to whichever MP I felt like then rather than an MP I didn't like.

3) The Speaker.
I think the current Speaker is... well lets just say "not very good" and the previous guy, Mr Martin, was worse. So we definately need to beef up the Speaker so we can keep the children, sorry, Honourable Members, in line.
Does the Speaker have to be an MP? Doesn't seem that fair to me to be honest... but who else. There are enough folk gadding about the Commons who aren't MP's who have important jobs. Why not one of them? But make sure they have a spine eh... like Betty had.

That'll do for starters..

Add your comments and own reforms if you like.

[Phil Carter]

Hello John,

Speakers, it seems, are not what they used to be...Betty Boothroyd was brilliant...Selwyn Lloyd was excellent, but for me the best in recent years was George Thomas.

Yup, Betty had some spine that lass...

best wishes

Phil

[ChrisGeorge]

Hello johns

I wonder if you really need two Houses of Parliament? Or if there is to be two perhaps what was the Lords could be just a clearinghouse for ideas or a debating chamber. I'm not clear about whether that is what the House of Lords is right now. In any case, what we have here in the United States, as shown by a number of instances of stymied legislation in recent months, is a lower body, the House of Representatives, that is able to pass legislation with a certain amount of effort and an upper body, the Senate, that often proves itself unable to pass what the first chamber has passed. So it's not a very workable system.

I believe we need electoral/legislative reform here in the United States to solve the problem.

The difference between the two U.S. legislative bodies is that the House of Representatives is more representational of the general population than is the Senate, give or take some gerrymandering of congressional districts. For the Senate every one of the fifty U.S. states gets two senators no matter the size of the state or the population size, or whether the state is largely rural or urban, so little Rhode Island and Delaware have two senators each as do the massive states of Texas and Alaska, rural Nevada or Iowa or more urban New York or Pennsylvania.

All the best

Chris