• he / him / his

Second-rate fruit.

Check out @Eurovision and @CollinsSubmissions


I don't have any hidden profile links, you're not missing anything.


Love Cycle: A Soap Operetta
youtu.be/jNaWwh-PVCI
Neocities (Everything else is here)
cofruitrigus.neocities.org/

cofruitrigus
@cofruitrigus

But it's just getting rid of the remaining hereditary peers? Like, yes that's undemocratic, but the real problem with the lords is that they're in there for life. The second issue being that none of them are elected, hereditary or not. And what's even the point of House of Lords reform if the Lords Spiritual are kept around?


cofruitrigus
@cofruitrigus

I'd forgotten this but in 2022 they were planning to scrap the lords completely and replace it...

...then their manifesto included just cutting the hereditary peers and imposing retirement on lords over the age of 80...

...and now they've cut that second part.

They suck so much. Even when they're doing something I agree with there's just no ambition. A massive majority going to waste.


Rail renationalisation good, no-fault eviction ban good. Conversion therapy ban good in theory, but given their stance on trans people I'm skeptical.


You must log in to comment.

in reply to @cofruitrigus's post:

The solution I heard recommended back in the day was that they should constitute the upper house by party based on a proportional number of votes received, but it's unlikely to happen because it would make them more democratic than parliament.

I think if we get something like that, it'd be paired with a new system for the commons that keeps constituencies. But nothing's going to happen unless one of the smaller parties ends up in coalition.

It would be a big improvement to just set a limit on how long anyone can sit in the Lords of, like, 20 years. Or ideally less.