Thought Id start this one going because its rather dead on this board at the moment and I suppose all my usual muckers are either at the Stella tennis event watching Dim Tim (lose again) or at Henly Regatta eating cucumber sandwiches (they wish,...NOT).

Anyway please feel free to just talk to yourself blast away and let it go on any company or subject you wish. Just wish Id thought of this one before.

cheers GF.

ah, but promised to whom and by whom?

The question is not where .. but when, I think you will agree -):

TAX CREDIT CUTS
that the bill has been delayed - i wonder for how long - while it is "reconsidered" may turn out to be one of the best things that ever happened to this gov't ..... had the bill passed through without amendment, then it could have been disastrous for both the gov't and of course those on the sharp end

Why?

The taxpayer cant keep paying these subsidies, why prolong the agony?

i thoroughly agree that the benefit system needs to be overhauled and reduced ..... however, when the application of these particular cuts is deeply questioned by members of all parties, then it behoves the gov't to take a further look

The cuts will take place exactly as intended, but there will be transitional relief. There will also be moves to curb the powers of the Lords.

Gambler Gideon Osborne vowed last night to rein in the power of the Lords after he suffered a "humiliating defeat" over his plan to cut tax credits by £4 billion. The chancellor said that the unprecedented vote, which left his "budget policy in limbo", raised constitutional issues about unelected peers that would be "dealt with" by himself and the prime minister.

The cuts will take place exactly as intended, but there will be transitional relief.
that's fine and is exactly what was intended by last night's vote in HoL
a little less hubris and the gov't might have woken up b4 trying to strongarm this piece of legislation through both houses - and getting a deserved bloody nose


There will also be moves to curb the powers of the Lords.
notwithstanding the HoL is an unelected body - rather like the unaccountability of eu legislature - in this instance, they have acted very responsibly insofar as there was much x-party support
it looks a moot point as to whether or not the borderline of "accepted convention" was overstepped

Osborne was likely going to add transitional relief anyway due to opposition in the Cabinet.

The Lords behaviour is serious and they need to be brought to heel. It does not matter if what they did was right or wrong. It is not their place to behave as they did. They are an unelected body and blocked the will of a democratically elected body. That can't be allowed to continue. Their purpose is to amend and revise. They have no constitutional right to block or delay legislation. I would like to see the whole set of tax credit regulations resubmitted as primary legislation and not as a financial instrument. Then the HoL could not do what they did last night as the Parliament Act could be used. They need slapping down to stop them interfering with the process of government.

well he should have spoken up shouldn't he!
he had plenty of opportunity to do so or at least to intimate that some moderation was already under consideration
a very very bad error of judgment by the gov't, and osborne specifically

============

some humility from osborne would not have gone amiss, rather than throwing a tantrum like a thwarted bully

That is irrelevant. The Lords have overstepped their position. There is some important legislation coming along over the next year that that are not going to like. They can't be allowed to derail the government's intentions.

you're very good at trotting out the party line

more objectively, i can see that this specific is a very moot point as to whether or not "accepted convention" was breached ......
that DC absolutely and specifically stated before the election that child benefits would not be touched, was clearly substantially less (or do i mean more?) than than being economic with the truth

that both my wife and i think the legislation needs (considerable?) amendment and were delighted that HoL voted as it did, should - but assuredly won't - ring some alarm bells within the tory party hierarchy

the more DC and GO protest the correctness of this legislation as it stands, and to jump up and down that HoL was seriously out of order, the more they alienate voters
for GO to pretend that amendment was already in process is just a blatant lie - otherwise he would have said so loud and clear at some point within the last 10 days

it is this that you should be passing back to your "lord and masters", and not just defending them blindly

I am not bothered about the actual legislation as there are a number of ways that Osborne can get his way. It is the undermining of the supremacy of the Commons that is the problem. If it happens regularly it would be impossible to govern. There would be no point in having a majority in the Commons. It is easy to see the problems that could occur but just looking at the US system. Even a coalition government would have the same problem.

Osborne on his feet right now in Commons on Sky news and Parliament Channel.

i am more concerned about the specific and apparent unfairness of the tax credit cuts as currently set out

DC/GO reckoned they could ride roughshod across clear x-party concerns
even if the means were technically wrong, the end result of getting the legislation re-examined fully justifies them

it is the strength of feeling among conservative mps as well as peers - and let's leave aside the core tory voters - that requires heeding, but it is clear that it was being totally ignored

the tories are lucky that there are still 3-4 years until the next election, but the warning bells have been rung ...... turn a deaf ear, and the tories will greatly regret it

You have to realise that this legislation was put before the Commons three times and a majority voted for it. That is the process of democracy. The Lords have no mandate to vote anything down whether good or bad. What they did has no connection with democracy. It is a collection of unelected people who are supposed to discuss and make suggestions to legislation.

I was taught, when very young that, if I "voted" for something, or put my signature agreeing to an action, then it should be according to my thought of whether it was right or wrong and not in response to coercion, or bribery!

For my sins, in the distant past have been secretary and member of various committees, and accepted the above and tried to apply the above.

(When acting as secretary, even though I may have disagreed with the committee as a whole, I acted on their "directives", but would certainly try to argue against such on a personal level and to have them reviewed. Also, reviewed my own positioning.)

I think the UK political system of the whole stinks, and I think all votes in the H of P and H of Lords should be votes of conscience and secret.

(Have a look at the individuals who were trying to defraud the "expenses claims" still sitting on various Select Committees.)

That does not mean that individuals should not group together to form policy and put those policies to the vote.

I think there is need of a reviewing chamber (Hof L), elected or appointed (by whom?) on ability.

A revisory body may address problems before they occur in practice. Less haste more speed.

Also, I am fed up with the Lynton Crosby, Osborne mantras being trotted out repeatedly, and routinely by the hirelings.

Such, as I would apply to Hays to be.
-====-==-=-==

PS, the HofL votes were not only against the policies but also a vote against the arrogance of the present cabal who have taken the Con party over!

If this had been a Conservative HoL blocking Labour legislation, there would have been such howls of complaint and something being done to curtail the power of the Lords.

The Conservatives have never done something similar. Even in 1945, when the Conservatives had a huge majority in the HoL of around several hundred, they did not block legislation by Labour that brought in Nationalisation and the National Health Service. The Conservative dominated Lords could have wrecked the post war Labour government. They took the view that the voters had voted in a Labour government and it should be allowed to legislate and govern.

Ps.

What was being pointed out in the House of Lords, is that there is a complete loss in trust by the membership and the country as whole, that Osborne and Cameron will keep their promises. Ie, they think they and cohorts are a bunch of self-interested liars.

P 64139

I think in 1945, the voting in the G/E pointed out that the tories had been rejected and that the policies being implemented were necessary and for the benefit of all in society.

It was recognised that "changes" were necessary.

The present "government's" policies are seen as blindly retrogressive in the way they are being played out.

Bollocks Fred (as per). The consensus imo is the cuts were too harsh to implement straight away. As for the UK political arena stinking as you put it. You have your nose to near to your left wing arse :0)