Hacker News Reader

Comment by stuaxo | Hacker News Reader

I wonder if part of the reason Britain is moving The Lords and the BBC away from London is to avoid scrutiny from both of those.

The Lords is an irrelevance which should be abolished, and the BBC has a UK-wide remit. There's already quite a chunk of the BBC in Manchester.

It has and does act as a check on the HOC

Yes, and imagine having that role played by elected members.

They would be beholden to political machinations which get them elected and not do a very good job at it.

There are a lot of things with HoL but being unelected is not one of them.

You're right, we should do away with those pesky machinations and get rid of the elected lower house.

I appreciate the richness you bring to inference.

Why do you assume elected members must necessarily be better? I think a mixed system can balance the dangers (and each has their dangers) of each.

Because the UK is the worst bastion of social classism?

> you assume elected members must necessarily be better?

Yes. You can get rid of elected representatives.

It will be PR with a list system aka only very safe party insiders will get in.

Yo wont get the "stroppy bastards" who actually hold the executives toes to the fire.

Is it really the best we can do in the 21st century?

Human nature doesn't change. Conditions might.

Dumb American question: Is "The Lords" shorthand for "The house of Lords"?

I'm a brit and had to google. Apparently they may move temporarily while refurbing the usual location.