What’s the purpose in having an unelected second house if they don’t vote with their conscience? Democracy doesn’t mean being mindless drones.
-
-
Deze Tweet is niet beschikbaar.
-
Als antwoord op @PoliticallyL0st
Why ever not? The elected first house is filled with muppets, who will vote for the government motion regardless, and the house of lords will do what it has done pretty much since 1911, and vote in favour of the government in the second reading.
1 antwoord 0 retweets 0 vind-ik-leuks -
Deze Tweet is niet beschikbaar.
-
Als antwoord op @PoliticallyL0st
Sure we can, referendums to abolish them, petitioning the government to do so, or reforming them. Besides, the House of Lords hasn't held real power since the 1911 House of Lords Act. All they can do is send bills back to the Commons.
1 antwoord 0 retweets 0 vind-ik-leuks -
Deze Tweet is niet beschikbaar.
-
Als antwoord op @PoliticallyL0st
Also The Kerr amendment was so easily supported precisely because it did not commit the UK to staying in a customs union, and merely asked for a statement on plans to keep the option open.
1 antwoord 0 retweets 0 vind-ik-leuks -
Deze Tweet is niet beschikbaar.
-
Als antwoord op @PoliticallyL0st
If that's the case, then who started the discussion about bringing up the Customs Union? And why was that allowed to be part of the civil discuourse?
1 antwoord 0 retweets 0 vind-ik-leuks -
Deze Tweet is niet beschikbaar.
Het laden lijkt wat langer te duren.
Twitter is mogelijk overbelast of ondervindt een tijdelijke onderbreking. Probeer het opnieuw of bekijk de Twitter-status voor meer informatie.