Parliamentary Bulldozing

malcyb · Mon 06 Mar, 2006 20.53

I must say I was rather glad to read this on the BBC News Page tonight
"Government plans to make all passport applicants also have an ID card have been defeated in the Lords".
Apparently the Lords have kicked it out because "Opposition peers say the plans break the government's promise that ID cards will initially be voluntary".
So fair enough. There needs to be a bit of twoing and throwing between the Commons and the Lords until all parties have got it sorted.
But what makes me mad is this latest bullyboy bulldozing comment by the government:
"The government has not ruled out using the Parliament Act to force through the measure".
Are they that desperate or do they just want to break the Lords as well as going against public opinion?
What do others think about this?

marksi · Mon 06 Mar, 2006 20.59

Don't get too excited. The government can invoke the Parliament Act of 1911 and 1949 amendment to over-rule the Lords and push through the legislation anyway.

malcyb · Mon 06 Mar, 2006 21.08

I know. That's what worries me. If they get away with doing that who knows how far they couldl go? ...and what would happen to the Lords?

cwathen · Mon 06 Mar, 2006 21.16

In principal, I back the Parliament Act. For all it's faults, the present government was legitimately elected by the people of this country (even if technically it was appointed by the crown). The Lords continues to be a house which is not elected by the people of this country.

Although in this instance I agree with the Lords' opposition of compulsary ID cards, I still cannot agree with them in principal.

It's time this country underwent the same reform which many others did well over a hundred years ago - formally acknowledge the royal family and the monarchy for what it practically is (a tourist attraction to bring the americans in) and appoint the prime minister of the house of commons as head of state (which he effectively is anyway). Do away with the unelected house of lords, and allow this country to formally be what it really is - a democracy, not a country officially ruled by an unelected monarch, with an unelected house of lords sitting above an elected house of commons.

I personally detest Tony Blair, but nevertheless in a modern world he has greater claim to the position of head of state of this country than Queen Elizabeth II ever has or ever will.

Jenny · Tue 07 Mar, 2006 09.56

cwathen wrote:The Lords continues to be a house which is not elected by the people of this country.

Considering what the people of this country are like, I'd call that a positive.

Jamez · Tue 07 Mar, 2006 15.05

Jenny wrote:
cwathen wrote:The Lords continues to be a house which is not elected by the people of this country.
Considering what the people of this country are like, I'd call that a positive.

I agree.

I don't know why we don't deport all our criminals and other undesirables to the other side of the world, like we used to.

Guantanamo Bay is a stroke of genius.

Sput · Tue 07 Mar, 2006 15.07

If we had an equivalent of Guantanamo, how would we know they were criminals?

Jamez · Tue 07 Mar, 2006 15.13

Sput wrote:If we had an equivalent of Guantanamo, how would we know they were criminals?

"Intelligence" through biometric ID cards and surveilance cameras on the end of every street in the country.

Anyone with a beard and acting suspiciously, should be detained in the interests of "national security".

It's curtains for Nick Harvey, then!

Sput · Tue 07 Mar, 2006 17.05

Quite! I still fail to see how ID cards are going to help anything. The only thing it comes close to being useful for is identity theft - but even then it's not going to *stop* it outright, just make it a little easier to prove who you are after it happens.

Jamez · Tue 07 Mar, 2006 17.12

Sput wrote:Quite! I still fail to see how ID cards are going to help anything. The only thing it comes close to being useful for is identity theft - but even then it's not going to *stop* it outright, just make it a little easier to prove who you are after it happens.

Yep.

And a terrorist could easily hijack a plane on its way to Britain from a foreign country and slam it into the houses of parliament, or even better, 10 Downing Street.

Jenny · Tue 07 Mar, 2006 18.32

Jamez wrote:And a terrorist could easily hijack a plane on its way to Britain from a foreign country and slam it into the houses of parliament, or even better, 10 Downing Street.

(Confusing reference alert)

Only if they put Simon Woodroffe in charge of air traffic control!