Wednesday 28 October 2015

Chamber Service

People abroad must sometimes wonder why we do not riot against the existence of the House of Lords. But we are not much of a riotous lot.

And if we were going to have riots, then they would be far more likely over the tax credit cuts that the Lords have just voted down, than over the House of Lords itself.

Why do people think that that House is still full of toffs? That is the House of Commons.

Britain is about to complete 35 years of Marxism in reverse: Thatcher and Blair defeated the proletariat on behalf of the bourgeoisie, and now Cameron and Osborne are planning to defeat the bourgeoisie (the businesspeople, academics, and senior public sector managers in the Lords) on behalf of the aristocracy.

We have all mused on potential alternatives to the second chamber, and I myself have occasionally even been paid to do so, when there was no possibility that any of it might ever come to anything.

Now, however, the threat is from that which is always the most ruthless section of our body politic, namely the Tory upper classes when they have been denied their own way.

This time, therefore, it could happen. Almost certainly, that would mean a county-based House, elected by First Past The Post. An alternative really does need to be in place.

Every six years, let each of the 99 lieutenancy areas elect three Senators, one Labour, one Conservative, and one Lib Dem, with each of those parties submitting its internally determined shortlist of two to the judgement of the electorate at large.

A week later, or a week earlier, let each of the nine English regions elect 30 Senators, namely six Labour, six Conservatives, six Lib Dems, six from other parties that did not thereafter contest elections to the House of Commons, and six Independents to sit as Crossbenchers.

Any member of the relevant party would be eligible to contest the first, second and third categories of election. Each of us would vote for one candidate, and the top six would be elected.

The fourth category would be elected by party list, and the fifth by the same means as the first three, but open only to people who were members of no party.

On the same day, let Scotland and Wales each elect five Labour, five Conservative, five Lib Dem, five Nationalist, five non-Commons other party, and five Crossbench Senators.

And let Northern Ireland elect three from Labour, three from the Tories, three from the Lib Dems, three from the UUP, three from the DUP, three from the SDLP, three from Sinn Féin, three from the Alliance Party, three from non-Commons other parties, and three Crossbenchers.

A grand total of 657 Senators. Quite large, but necessarily so, and much smaller than the House of Lords.

Representation of the rural Labour vote, which would pose quite a challenge to many a local Tory oligarchy. Representation of the Unionist majority in Scotland. And representation of Northern Ireland within the Labour, Conservative and Lib Dem bodies at Westminster.

The aristocratic wing of the Conservative Party has been crossed, and it is merciless when that happens. It is going to propose some elected alternative, to its own satisfaction. That would not constitute an improvement.

8 comments:

  1. It would be richly ironic if the Tories did this, since abolishing the House of Lords has been the aim of the democracy-worshipping Left for decades, and was in the most left-wing Labour manifesto in history (Michael Foot's 1983 manifesto promised: ""Take action to abolish the undemocratic House of Lords as quickly as possible"")!

    The Tories, who briefly fought New Labour's constitutional vandalism under Hague, before Lord Cranbourne betrayed them, becoming one with the democracy-worshipping Left.

    The Tories adopting Michael Foot's 1983 manifesto; well, Peter Hitchens, for one, wouldn't be at all surprised.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. There has never been a Labour policy in favour of an elected second chamber. There has been a Tory one for almost as long as you have been alive.

      I remember the Tories screaming for one while Blair ruled it out from the Despatch Box, when you were a small child. Hague was advocating one in print when I was a small child.

      From what I have been told this morning, I was right about what the Tories have in mind. In practice, almost everyone in the thing would be a blood relative of one, two or all three of David Cameron, Samantha Cameron and George Osborne.

      Just like the old days. You ought to be pleased.

      Delete
    2. In its heart Labour is much more constitutionally conservative than the Tories. Blair only got devolution though because it was "John Smith's legacy", there was no referendum on PR, there was no move to an elected second chamber, Blair and Brown openly opposed both PR and an elected second chamber. As you say, the second one has been Tory policy since so long ago it makes no difference. That used to be because it was the logic of Thatcherism which was why Labour was against it, now it is the chance of the people in her own party who got rid of her to get rid of her sort of people and Blair's as a political force.

      Delete
    3. It was very much her sort of people who scuppered the last plan, by voting with Labour against it because that was a way of giving Cameron a kick. But he no longer even has to pretend to be interested in them.

      There is a kind of call-and-response in which the answer is always "Proportional Representation", defined as STV for multimember constituencies. But that could only work in very urban areas.

      (Don't say "Ireland". They have it there. But that doesn't mean that it works. It is just that once you have it, then you are stuck with it.)

      There also seems to be a curious fantasy that First Past The Post is unique to Britain, when in fact it is the most used electoral system in the world, covering 49 per cent of all voters.

      Something similar exists on the Right in relation to open primaries, which have of course guarded so well in the United States against corruption, apathy, cynicism, machine politics, endless incumbency, and partisan tribalism.

      But, again, Cameron no longer even has to pretend to be interested in them.

      Delete
  2. One more reason why you ought to be in the Shadow Cabinet or the Leader's Office. That non-entity is back in the village, you probably know. I hope you find that as funny as everybody else does.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. If anything, even more so. That is quite some helping of humble pie.

      Delete
    2. That's no way to talk about her. But it is quite some tail between his legs.

      Delete