house of lords: allocate peerages like jury service

The current system: http://lordsappointments.independent.gov.uk/

My repeal would not be to the system but to its workload, by trialling another system.

Allocate one jurer in a million a life peerage, or some variation on this theme:

  • the oldest child of one jurer in a million
     
  • the elected top 50% of a group of randomly chosen jurers, if 50% stand for life peerage in a mainly online and TV hustings system.
     
  • the system that arrises after a few trials of different ideas as above and popular comment. It could be that some of these new lords, like pools winners, wish they never had the chance to make fools of themselves and have suggestions for changing the system more.
     
  • hereditary peers who have been refused their former membership, and have below average income or have an unusual career, possibly with a change to old laws to make peerages unisex. This last idea is coming from a different direction but you get the gist of the first few.

Why is this idea important?

The current system: http://lordsappointments.independent.gov.uk/

My repeal would not be to the system but to its workload, by trialling another system.

Allocate one jurer in a million a life peerage, or some variation on this theme:

  • the oldest child of one jurer in a million
     
  • the elected top 50% of a group of randomly chosen jurers, if 50% stand for life peerage in a mainly online and TV hustings system.
     
  • the system that arrises after a few trials of different ideas as above and popular comment. It could be that some of these new lords, like pools winners, wish they never had the chance to make fools of themselves and have suggestions for changing the system more.
     
  • hereditary peers who have been refused their former membership, and have below average income or have an unusual career, possibly with a change to old laws to make peerages unisex. This last idea is coming from a different direction but you get the gist of the first few.

Removing the right to inherted peerage

To become a peer it should be granted due to service to the people and the people should be allowed to decide is worthy NOT MPs or the Queen.

The Queen and Political Parties etc can nominate peers, then an online voting system can be used to elect them.

Why is this idea important?

To become a peer it should be granted due to service to the people and the people should be allowed to decide is worthy NOT MPs or the Queen.

The Queen and Political Parties etc can nominate peers, then an online voting system can be used to elect them.

Democratically elect the experts in the Lords – say “no” to more constituencies.

Democratically elect experts into the Lords by having candidates stand in national level contests – say "no" to more constituencies.

The Lords should be democratic and should contain experts. This is achieved by making sure it doesn't just become another house of commons with constituencies, but with being able to vote for or against any candidate who stands. The candidates will then have to get votes by saying what their expertise and what their views actually are. You can also vote against candidates. The voting is continuous so that its always the candidates with the best score for the last 6 months that are representatives. 

Why is this idea important?

Democratically elect experts into the Lords by having candidates stand in national level contests – say "no" to more constituencies.

The Lords should be democratic and should contain experts. This is achieved by making sure it doesn't just become another house of commons with constituencies, but with being able to vote for or against any candidate who stands. The candidates will then have to get votes by saying what their expertise and what their views actually are. You can also vote against candidates. The voting is continuous so that its always the candidates with the best score for the last 6 months that are representatives. 

House of Lords like Jury Duty

Why not randomly select Lords from the population, in a way similar to Jury Duty. Individuals would serve 1-2 year terms as a senator or congressman, during which their job will be held open for them outside. 

requirements

Basic education (english, maths, science)

No criminal convictions

British citizen

Why is this idea important?

Why not randomly select Lords from the population, in a way similar to Jury Duty. Individuals would serve 1-2 year terms as a senator or congressman, during which their job will be held open for them outside. 

requirements

Basic education (english, maths, science)

No criminal convictions

British citizen

Idea for New House of Lords

 

Replace current House of Lords with an elected House of Lords based around the traditional counties (Will equal just over 100 lords) and remove the Lords Spiritual. New House of Lords led by Lord Chancellor (Leader of biggest party in House of Lords)

 

If fixed term parliaments are introduced have the election for the Lord's in the middle of the Commons terms

Why is this idea important?

 

Replace current House of Lords with an elected House of Lords based around the traditional counties (Will equal just over 100 lords) and remove the Lords Spiritual. New House of Lords led by Lord Chancellor (Leader of biggest party in House of Lords)

 

If fixed term parliaments are introduced have the election for the Lord's in the middle of the Commons terms

A modern secular state

Religion does not need the special status it currently enjoys within the British state. Quite rightly, we have laws that ban discrimination on the basis of religion or faith. That is sufficient. We have already abolished the common law offences of blasphemy and blasphemous libel in England and Wales, which were long recognised as an anachronism. We should now go further and end the formal establishment of the Anglican Church as the state religion of Britain.

No one should occupy a place in Britain’s legislature on the basis of religious office. There is no objection to holders of religious office being members of either house of Parliament or any other part of government, but they should only win such status through the same democratic processes as everyone else.

We must also repeal or rewrite the laws that require schools to impose a daily act of collective worship upon pupils and we must remove the special privilege given to Christianity within religious education (I understand this to be in the Education Act 1944 as amended by the Education Reform Act 1988 and the School Standards and Framework Act 1998). The removal of anachronistic religious requirements in our education system is a matter of prudent use of funding as well as basic freedoms.
 

Why is this idea important?

Religion does not need the special status it currently enjoys within the British state. Quite rightly, we have laws that ban discrimination on the basis of religion or faith. That is sufficient. We have already abolished the common law offences of blasphemy and blasphemous libel in England and Wales, which were long recognised as an anachronism. We should now go further and end the formal establishment of the Anglican Church as the state religion of Britain.

No one should occupy a place in Britain’s legislature on the basis of religious office. There is no objection to holders of religious office being members of either house of Parliament or any other part of government, but they should only win such status through the same democratic processes as everyone else.

We must also repeal or rewrite the laws that require schools to impose a daily act of collective worship upon pupils and we must remove the special privilege given to Christianity within religious education (I understand this to be in the Education Act 1944 as amended by the Education Reform Act 1988 and the School Standards and Framework Act 1998). The removal of anachronistic religious requirements in our education system is a matter of prudent use of funding as well as basic freedoms.