[Vicky.]

I thought it was to block unfair legislations and such, but it appears they can just be completely ignored if whoever is in government decides they want to do it anyway?

http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news...ws-ram-7478566

Iain Duncan Smith has vowed to ram through disability benefit cuts tonight despite a stark warning by his own human rights watchdog.

The top Tory vented his fury at being blocked for a second time by the House of Lords in his bid to cut Employment and Support Allowance (ESA) by £30 a week.

A letter he sent to Tory MPs yesterday, obtained by the Mirror, warned them to "strongly resist" the Lords' changes and accused peers of "an abuse of Parliamentary process" ahead of a House of Commons vote tonight.

The Work and Pensions Secretary warned blocking the cut would cost the government £1.3billion and raged: "The Commons as the elected chamber must now have the final say."

The 'abuse of process' claim appears to contradict his department's own spin doctors, who said the Lords vote was a "routine part of the legislative process".

And his stubborn missive came despite the government's own human rights watchdog warning he needed more evidence about how the cuts will hit the disabled or mentally ill.

So why do we have them?

[bitontheslide]

Successive governments have eroded the power of the lords, either by clipping its wings, or by filling it with members of their own party. It should perform an essential checks and balances function against potentially crazy governments, but it has never been particularly representative of the people or particularly effective. It needs scrapping and replaced by an elected body

[joeysteele]

They can hold up legislation and also suggest amendments, however if a govt has an overall majority and is a govt like this one,that refuses to listen to anyone with real arguments against their rotten policies then they can overturn the defeats in the Commons.

Often govts will take on board the Lords views and look seriously at amendments from them but sadly not this one,no way.
The Lords can really in effect then only delay the process of legislation when they are also, indeed like everyone else ignored by an authoritarian govt. hell bent on not listening to anyone or any other body whatsoever.

Of course if 'all' the Conservative MPs who think this plan wrong,(and there are many), were to actually follow their consciences and vote against it when it next comes up again, then the vile Ian Duncan Smith would be well and truly thwarted and the Lords win the day.

[Kizzy]

I think it's what it's classed as, if it's a money bill they can't send it back.

[arista]

"So why do we have them? "

There is due to be a Cull.
far to many are doing bugger all
but collecting money.

[Northern Monkey]

Targeting the disabled like this is a very low blow.£30 a week is the majority of some peoples food money.If only there was a decent Labour party to get this lot out.The sooner Labour gets a serious leader the better.

[Vicky.]

Well if they are useless, we should be rid really. Just another pointless expense.

[DemolitionRed]

Originally Posted by arista

"So why do we have them? "

There is due to be a Cull.
far to many are doing bugger all
but collecting money.

The last PM who did a large cull was Tony Blair and although he had sinister intentions that never materialized, he did get rid of the chaff.

The problem with dismantling the Lords is, Cameron, just like Blair intended, would likely replace it with a body of people nominated by himself and if this happens, we start to move into a dictatorship government.

More recently the Lords have pro-actively been scrutinizing and forcing the governments hand (iron fist) and with a government like this, that has to be good doesn't it or do you think we shouldn't have this upper body of parliament
speak and ask questions on behalf of the British public?.

[Vicky.]

Originally Posted by DemolitionRed

The last PM who did a large cull was Tony Blair and although he had sinister intentions that never materialized, he did get rid of the chaff.

The problem with dismantling the Lords is, Cameron, just like Blair intended, would likely replace it with a body of people nominated by himself and if this happens, we start to move into a dictatorship government.

More recently the Lords have pro-actively been scrutinizing and forcing the governments hand (iron fist) and with a government like this, that has to be good doesn't it or do you think we shouldn't have this upper body of parliament
speak and ask questions on behalf of the British public?.

From the news recently though, the government can just overrule anything the lords say, so no forcing, and no iron fists if they can just be ignored and whatever the Torys want to do now gets shoved through anyway.. so whats the point in having them at all?

[Vicky.]

http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news...ts-esa-7488790

Sort of on topic, surprised Cameron abstained from voting on this. Nearly as good as him voting against, not quite, but slight respect for him for not backing them.

[MTVN]

Originally Posted by Vicky.

http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news...ts-esa-7488790

Sort of on topic, surprised Cameron abstained from voting on this. Nearly as good as him voting against, not quite, but slight respect for him for not backing them.

Expect he just couldn't make it to the Commons tbh or thought he wouldn't be needed to carry the vote

[Z]

From memory, any proposed bill in the House of Commons has to go through a few rounds of voting before it can be passed into law and the House of Lords is one of the latter stages of that process - members are usually rich landowners, distant royal family members, honorary titled people who have been appointed by the government... except they've had their powers eroded over the years so that the government can push through the most important bills. I think the unwritten rule is that they only use that power of veto rarely because otherwise it would render the HoL pointless and they are there as a power check so if a bill is overwhelmingly rejected the government should accept it etc...

[Tom4784]

Ugh, I just checked if my MP voted for it and he did, what an absolute ****. This is a low income area that's pretty much dependent on things like working tax credits and ESA and such, he's helping the tories kill the area.

[DemolitionRed]

Originally Posted by Vicky.

From the news recently though, the government can just overrule anything the lords say, so no forcing, and no iron fists if they can just be ignored and whatever the Torys want to do now gets shoved through anyway.. so whats the point in having them at all?

True but it would be difficult for the government to do this without making themselves even more unpopular. They have made threats recently but they will be closely watching the populations response to those threats. People need to support the Lords because its the Lords that trying to support the people.