House of Lords hastens its own demise

They're not very clever are they?

Having encountered a local LibDem councillor I pointed out that they'd nominated two leadership candidates who would renege on their manifesto promise, and suggested that they'd pay for this at the next general election; and his reply was, oh, that doesn't matter, people will have forgotten all about it by then. Maybe he's right, but it does show what they're like beneath their sanctimonious exteriors.

Who wants to bet that in the worst case scenario (ratification goes ahead) The British Parliament is abolished on or soon after 5/5/2010?... Sites all over Europe are betting on it. Most such sites go down very quickly indeed. Hmm. Parliament first destroys democracy with the tripartite pact. Then is itself destroyed. Answers many questions does it not?.. The same sites maintain that only trans EU parties will remain legal. "Small" parties will be banned. So, bye bye to LibLabCon as well as BNP and UKIP etc. The EU is a despotic nightmare. Better Off Out.

No, I wouldn't expect the British Parliament to be abolished as soon as 2010. Why should it be?

The Lib Dems always behave like this. In local politics for example they produce a newsletter called 'Focus' which is delivered door to door. They write different content on the same subject to suit whichever part of the constituency they wish to ingratiate themselves with. So for example they are all for local catchments for schools in the area with a good school and for a lottery approach when the local catchment has a poor school. All in the same constituency or ward even ! From my experience as an elected councillor (Tory) the Liberals are the most devious and dishonest political party I have ever experienced. Liberal Councillors will be "passionate" ( a favourite Liberal emote) about comprehensive scvhools whilst sending their own kids to private schools and/or teaching in private schools themselves ( actual cases). We even had one, who despite her "passion", tried to get her brat into a selective grammar school. Liberal Party Members in my experience tend to be downwardly mobile in vast numbers. Their social conscience comes from a privileged upbringing often followed by their own life failure. Their egalitarian principles are based often on their own financial straits !

If you are as baffled as I by the libdim position, why not drop an email to Cleggover? Mind you, I did this about a fortnight ago, and have yet to receive the courtesy of a reply. His email is libdemleader@parliament.uk

I do not follow the reasoning between the Lib Dems' refusal to be seen with UKIP and the reconstitution of the House of Lords. The two UKIP representatives in this debate were talking sense but they both had an agenda which is 'get out of Europe at all costs'. The Lib Dems were clearly not going to be seen dead in the voting lobby with them. If, on the other hand, it had been a Conservative sponsored motion the effects might have been different. In fact the Lib Dem spokesman Lord Wallace hinted significantly that he wanted to know the Conservative position on the matter. He would have been seen dead in the voting lobby with them, but not with UKIP. Lord Wallace (the Lib Dem spokesman in question) gave a good speech and our democracy depends on reasoned debates between these representatives of the people. How else should it be arranged? UKIP are a spanner in the works. People know what they stand for and use them to back out of uncomfortable questions and debates. The same can be said for the National Front, though I do not for a moment compare them with UKIP in policy terms or overall intelligence. They are a useful spanner in the works because, like the wheat and the darnel, they get mixed up in otherwise worthwhile debates. The Conservatives are indeed the Party that need to get their thinking clear on the Europe issue and present us with clear thinking which mixes limitation of the EU's incremental bureaucratic powers alongside reasonable inter-European co-operation. If they allow themselves to be hijacked by pressure groups, then that is their look-out and our loss. It is not so much a question of re-constituting the House of Lords (as New Labour would love to do), as training the Lords who are present to anticipate the pitfalls in the debates.

It's funny that such reasonably intelligent people find it so difficult to understand the concept of democracy...especially when they are supposed to be full time politicians. 'Parliament would be okay if it wasn't for the bloody voters!' That is the message they give us. This is why they would like to get away from all this democracy nonsense and get on with the job of governing. Preferably from somewhere central...in Europe. Funny how some New Labour types and Lib Dems accuse everyone else of being a fascist. Isn't this the very definition of fascism...being in control, unaccountable, out of reach of the constraining laws of the land?

for highlighting this appalling incident, which I read about today in my Open Europe press bulletin. The Lib Dem's hypocracy (spelling?) should be on every front page of every newspaper, but most just won't give a damn - which is why we are in this frightening position. I don't think that contacting Clegg would do any good, as the party is run by the supercilious Shirley Williams in the Lords. It was probably her idea that Lib Dem peers should vote against Lord Pearson's motion. However, many Lords of other colours must have joined them. Perhaps you could give us the names of these traitors? Anyway, how could we possibly expect Clegg to vote for an in/out referendum when he knows that we want OUT, and when he is paid such a handsome pension by Brussels!

The suggestion that this was the wrong sort of referendum is disingenuous. With an in-or-out vote the LibDems can be fairly sure of an "in" vote as even most sceptics of the Lisbon Treaty would, I think, prefer to be in. What is objectionable are the terms of the new treaty and that by voting "in" in a LibDem referendum, the public would be assumed to have accepted the Lisbon Treaty. It seems to me that the politicians have forgotten their first duty which is to represent the wishes of the people who elected them as their representatives. Since there seems to be an overwhelming desire for a referendum, MPs should ignore sophist partisan arguement and do what their electorates want; hold a referendum on the treaty as presented. I disagree with the notion that the House of Lords has set itself on a course for abolition by its actions. They have been no more dishonourable than the House of Commons. I fear that they will both be abolished and the Monarchy soon thereafter. What silly, silly people we have elected to represent us!

"With an in-or-out vote the LibDems can be fairly sure of an "in" vote. Really, if the votersof this country were shown the true costs and the few benifits of membership it might be a lot closer than you think.

Can you shed any light on the following: 1. Have Nick Clegg and other Party Leaders been promised a handsome EU pension if they support the Lisbon Treaty? Is it EU practice to promise these pensions in order to 'facilitate' the prompt approval of the LT in all of the European member countries by the agreed deadline? 2. Is there any current evidence or do you foresee let's say, 50 years down the line after the Lisbon Treaty has been ratified, that the Houses of Lords and Commons plus the Monarchy will have ceased to exist? What do you know or suspect will happen?

Daniel, when are you going to comment on the Lord's report on the Lisbon Treaty?

Since March, when the majority of MPs in the House of Commons voted against holding a national referendum on the revised EU Constitution, the I Want a Referendum campaign team has been busy lobbying Peers in the House of Lords. The Lords are due to vote on the referendum issue on 11 June and the Irish referendum is expected to take place on 12 June. With Stuart Wheeler's judicial review taking place on 9 and 10 June, that week will mark the climax of our campaign - and will almost certainly decide whether the Lisbon Treaty will be ratified or not. Is the issue likely to take on much greater prominence in the media than it has in the last months? As the Telegraph noted on Saturday: "Opponents of a referendum have so far tried to cling to the shadows. Now the light will be shone on them, in particular on the Lib Dem peers, who have nauseatingly broken their words to oppose the referendum." If a referendum amendment is to be won in the Lords, the key factor will be how the Liberal Democrats choose to vote. If the Conservatives combined with a significant number of crossbench peers vote in favour of a referendum, and the Lib Dems stuck to the line they took in the Commons and abstained, there is every chance that the Lords would vote in favour of a referendum. However, unfortunately, it has emerged that the Lib Dems in the House of Lords are set to change the party position on a referendum for a third time by voting with the Government against a referendum. Lord McNally, Lib Dem leader in the Lords has said, "We will not abstain on a referendum amendment in the Lords. The arithmetic in the Commons is different from the Lords... We will vote with the Government against a referendum on the treaty." (PA, 1 April) This latest Lib Dem u-turn has reportedly angered those former front-bench MPs who resigned their positions in the Commons in order to vote for the referendum they promised, rather than abstain. One Lib Dem MP told the Telegraph: "A lot of us are furious about this... Those of us in marginal seats who had to make a significant compromise on this issue are now being undermined by people who won't ever face the electorate." (3 April) Meanwhile, Lib Dem Lord Wallace of Saltaire revealed the poor attitude among some Lib Dem Lords to the Treaty debate by brazenly claiming: "It is not line-by-line scrutiny that we need." (PA, 22 April) Lib Dem Baroness Shirley Williams, who is rumoured to have threatened defection to Labour if the Lib Dems backed a referendum on the Lisbon Treaty, said of her party's manifesto promise of a referendum: "the commitment was embarrassing and I do not believe that it was in the interests of this country or in a good relationship with the rest of the European Union." (Hansard, 1 April) Roll on 11th June...

As Ireland's voters prepare to go to the polls on 12 June to give their verdict on the EU's Lisbon Treaty, the Irish government is intensifying its propaganda campaign. In particular Irish politicians are increasingly attempting to bully voters into accepting the Treaty by arguing that it would be a "disaster" if the country voted no and that it would lead to Ireland being pushed "to the outside" of the EU. All the polling evidence suggests that these bullying tactics are the most effective way of them achieving a 'yes' vote on 12 June. In order to show solidarity with voters in Ireland I Want a Referendum will be organising a gathering outside the Irish Embassy on Saturday 31 May. They are just one of the many groups who will be organising an event on this day across Europe under the banner of the European Referendum Campaign. How you can help At midday on Saturday 31 May they will be organising a short gathering outside the Irish Embassy in London (17 Grosvenor Place, closet tubes: Hyde Park Corner and Victoria). They will have a number of Irish and British flags to hand out, so there will be no need for anyone to bring their own banners or flags. The aim is to send a message of solidarity to Irish voters, not to demonstrate about the denial of our referendum here in the UK. Free cans of Guinness will be available on a first-come-first-served basis. If you would like to register for the event please email: Susannah@iwantareferendum.com If you can't make it to London, one of the leading Irish no campaigns, Libertas, would love to get pictures of you with similar home made banners and flags in your back gardens or outside your local village or town halls. They want to show that there is huge support for their campaign right across the EU. If you want to take a picture of you and some friends to demonstrate your support for the Irish no campaign please email it to info@libertas.org.

The Government has hired one of the country's most expensive QCs - Jonathan Sumption - to represent it in the judicial review on the Lisbon Treaty being brought by businessman Stuart Wheeler. Sumption also represented the Government in the Hutton Inquiry into the death of David Kelly and is reported to have charged the Government £800,000 to defend it in a class-action suit brought by Railtrack shareholders. The decision to hire Sumption shows how seriously the Government is taking Stuart Wheeler's case and that it is determined to spend as much of taxpayers' money as necessary to avoid holding the referendum it promised at the last election. It has also been reported that House of Commons Speaker Michael Martin is preparing to launch a legal counter challenge to Wheeler, arguing that the will of Parliament should not be overridden in the courts. How you can help So far, over £200,000 has been raised from 400 donors. If you haven't donated yet but would like to please visit Stuart Wheeler's website: http://www.stuartwheeler.co.uk/

Well said Hagar. Yes we all should back Mr Stuart Wheeler to save our freedoms from a corrupt Republic called the EU. To which the Queen and her family have abdicated to, Why she has accepted to be a citizen of the EU. Because of this SHE has ABDICATED. From this time and date all treaty,s ext, are then illegal as had no rights to allow HER government to sign. Albertof Alvelon.

Your last comment is most interesting. That is the section about That the house of Commons speaker Michael martin is preparing to launch a legal challenge that the Parliament should not be overridden in the courts. Well that as been the case, many times over the years. That is the courts HAVE overridden the parliamentry law as because unlawful in law.To laws that have been standing for 100s of years and been accepted by three crowned heads of state or more. One of them is that they cannot hand the rights to any foreign power. That was to stop the crown from coming under the control of the Roman Catholic Church. That has been from the Stuart Kings of Great Britain. This to day is the EU. Albert of Alvelon.

Albert, the Queen has not abdicated the throne. Maybe she's abdicated her constitutional responsibility, but then the loudest message coming from the British public in recent decades has been that the monarch should keep out of "politics", so who can blame her? So don't blame the Queen: she has never been in the position where she could intervene to put a stop to this EU crap - which is what it is, total crap - and be confident that the people would support her against the voices of republicanism. Rather, blame our elected representatives in the House of Commons, and then remember who elected them.

I read somewhere (it may have been a recent posting) that the EU plans to eventually rid Europe of the Monarchies - not that it would happen overnight but within this century. What do you think? Does anyone (including Daniel Hannan) know anthing about this?