I have risen from the slough of despond that I went into, after the Health and Social Care Bill got passed through Parliament. I have adopted a Lord and I have been given an interesting choice. I'm not going to tell you his name, but the above picture should help you work out who it is.
So have you adopted a Lord yet? Here's something to encourage you if you haven't. This is the breakdown of the political parties in the House of Lords;
Conservative 218
Labour 240
Liberal Democrat 91
Crossbench 184
Bishops 24
Other 31
So it should be possible to stop this bill, if we all write. Go on. I know how we're all feeling just now, but it is better to light a candle than curse the darkness. Do it.
5 comments:
Dear Julia,
Thanks but no thanks. The House of Lords is anti-democratic and should not be used to stop the passage of a bill that has been voted through by the democratically elected house. I do not like the bill, but do like democracy.
And that is before we get onto the West Lothian question.
Best wishes
Dr Phil
Hi Dr Phil,
Each to their own. I think there is a place for people who are appointed to government as well as those who are elected, and once you get past the ermine, you realise that this is a model that we use in many situations, for example health boards. And the House of Lords has stopped some of the more anti-democratic bills that have gone through in past years, or at least badly hamstrung them. I'm thinking in particular of the Legislatory and Regulatory Reform Act, which gained the nickname 'The Abolition of Parliament Act'.
As to the West Lothian question, well, I know it says England on the order paper, but it will profoundly affect us if it goes ahead. As people get turned away from hospitals and GP practices in England, they will look to Scotland and Wales to give them the treatment that they can't get down south. We have just had an outcry over charging English students university fees, but that'll be small beer to turning away those who are old, disabled and chronically ill because our services can't cope with the numbers. My attitude is to kill the bill now and worry about the constitution later.
Julie
The candle is lit.
I am afraid I don't care whether the Lords were elected or not - perhaps they might carry out the electorates will for it is certain that our elected MPs have not.
Anna :o]
Every single MP was made aware personally of the key feature of the HSCB i.e the abdication of the SOS's duty to provide. Unless they are all as thick as mince these MPs will have worked out that this opens the door to the NHS becoming only a kite mark in order to reassure us that it is safe in the hands of private companies. They will also have picked up on the "pathway" into the stock market that tax-payers money will soon follow.
It seems to me that there were strong forces lobbying and whipping these MPs. Most of them didn't even bother to turn up for the debate. This may have been because they already knew how they "had" to vote as a consequence of responding positively to these forces that were generally not doctors, nurses, other HCWs, patients or voters. If there had been a referendum on the content of this Bill without fudging the key issues, it would have tumbled.
Is this what most people understand as democracy?
It would be encouraging to see an Upper House that is measured and sensible, free from the vested interests of politicians, and who have a sensitivity to the will of the citizens of the country. How many members of the Upper House are closely affiliated to the political party appointing them? Many? Most? If so this does not bode well, because the main two political parties have slowly but relentlessly been promoting health and sickness as a commodity over decades, and now the LibDems are following. In my view the House of Lords was a safer place before Tony Blair saw to it that as much of the ermine was kicked out as he felt he could get away with at the time. In my view he wanted to tame the Lords not democratise it. Maybe only the Bishops, Cross-benchers and others can save the day!
Hi Anna, WD,
thanks for your comments. I think the Lords are certainly worth a shot and as I say, they have stepped into the breach whenever constitutional freedoms have been threatened; do you remember their 30 hour sit in to insert a 'sunset clause' into the Prevention of Terrorism Act? I think they are a vital check to the tyranny of the majority. I came across an interesting paper on how the Lords works and the influence that they have had on changing government policy over the years.
WD, I think you could see Conservatives joining the fight in this, because this bill does go against conservative principles of prudence and value for money. It's going to be a publicly subsidised market and it is a waste of money. The crossbenchers are going to be important; that's where the likes of the judges, doctors and scientists who really understand what this bill is doing sit. But let's see how it goes.
Post a Comment