While I understand what Charles is saying and I have no doubt that either of the two previous proposed chairs are women of impeccable judgement and character, I do feel strongly that on this occasion the chair should be someone who is demonstrably an outsider.
Sentamu fits the bill.
Sadly he's from The Church which is also the subject of a wide ranging investigation into child abuse. The headlines write themselves.
If you rule out Butler Sloss and Woolf for 'connections', you'll have to strike Sentamu off the list too. Same arguments for unsuitability.
There is absolutely no equivalence. None. We are talking about someone who had 7 shades of the proverbial beaten out of him in a prison cell for criticising Idi Amin. You couldn't get further from the cosy Westminster elite than that, and the victims would recognise that.
A Bishop who sits in the Lords certainly has many friends in high places.
When investigating allegations against the establishment concerning sexual abuse in a variety of settings there is simply not going to be someone nominated by the establishment who has not been tainted by it.
LOL....the idiot in the Guardian who wrote that article about the poppies installation is back again with a front page article and of course its the Daily Rant that are wrong (and the PM).
The backlash to his article was far wider than some little Englanders and the Daily Mail.
I believe the expression of when in a hole stop digging is rather fitting.
While I understand what Charles is saying and I have no doubt that either of the two previous proposed chairs are women of impeccable judgement and character, I do feel strongly that on this occasion the chair should be someone who is demonstrably an outsider.
Sentamu fits the bill.
Sadly he's from The Church which is also the subject of a wide ranging investigation into child abuse. The headlines write themselves.
If you rule out Butler Sloss and Woolf for 'connections', you'll have to strike Sentamu off the list too. Same arguments for unsuitability.
There is absolutely no equivalence. None. We are talking about someone who had 7 shades of the proverbial beaten out of him in a prison cell for criticising Idi Amin. You couldn't get further from the cosy Westminster elite than that, and the victims would recognise that.
A Bishop who sits in the Lords certainly has many friends in high places.
When investigating allegations against the establishment concerning sexual abuse in a variety of settings there is simply not going to be someone nominated by the establishment who has not been tainted by it.
Would Citizen Khan be racist if it was exactly the same, except all the Asian parts were played by white actors in make-up?
Man - "How was Pakistan?" Citizen Khan - "Just like Birmingham, only less Pakistanis!"
Isn't that racist? Hello?
It should be fewer...
You could construe "I hate Pakis" as racist.
Merely commenting on their geographic distribution is hardly racist.
I beg to differ.
Most "Pakistanis" in Birmingham re, of course, British nationals, either by duration of stay or birth. Refer to their ethnicity or religion if you must, but they're as British as I am.
Which cricket team do they support?
Just asking for a friend.
How would I know?
For the record, I support England at cricket, but Italy at soccer.
Con: Michael Fallon Lab: Chris Clark LD: Alan Bullion UKIP: Steve Lindsay Greens: Amelie Boleyn
Wasn't Sevenoaks the place where John Lennon (a member of a 60s group called The Beatles) bought the circus poster which was the inspiration for "Being for the benefit of Mr.Kite"?
I don't know. Must be online somewhere.
Well bugger me backwards with a splintered fiddle - it is.
When read carefully, it is more about shoring up power than distributing it.
That may be the BBC spin!
A brave decision from Ed.
I suspect it's not entirely been thought through. Does the statement "It cannot be right that the North West has almost the same population as London but only a small fraction of London's number of peers." refer to where the peers were born or where they live for example?
The problem with an elected second chamber is I'm sure we'd get a bunch of idiots. I don't like the current system at all - we get dreadful people placed in positions of power - Baronesses Warsi and Vadera for example. They were both put there because they helped their parties gender and ethnic credentials. (Please feel free to shoot me down on this - I have only a passing acquaintance with either of these lady's abilities - however they've both struck me as placeholders)
I'd like a second chamber filled with the wise. For example if we could enlist people like Jacob Bronowski that'd be good. I realise that there are rather few of these people around, but they do exist.
I disagree, we have had plenty of evidence that Ed Miliband isn't even up to being Leader of the Labour party, never mind the PM of the country. Miliband has even failed to connect with Labour voters, that is why he personal rating in the polls are so poor right now.
Didn't see the "man gives money to a homeless person" bombshell on the news anywhere.
Perhaps the dismal PBTories/SamCoates/Guido rabble got a little silly. Again.
Ed M is almost fortunate in that while many people may suspect he is going to be crap, we don't have definitive proof no matter how man awkward photos and poor ideas are stated, not until he is actually PM.
When read carefully, it is more about shoring up power than distributing it.
That may be the BBC spin!
A brave decision from Ed.
I suspect it's not entirely been thought through. Does the statement "It cannot be right that the North West has almost the same population as London but only a small fraction of London's number of peers." refer to where the peers were born or where they live for example?
The problem with an elected second chamber is I'm sure we'd get a bunch of idiots. I don't like the current system at all - we get dreadful people placed in positions of power - Baronesses Warsi and Vadera for example. They were both put there because they helped their parties gender and ethnic credentials. (Please feel free to shoot me down on this - I have only a passing acquaintance with either of these lady's abilities - however they've both struck me as placeholders)
I'd like a second chamber filled with the wise. For example if we could enlist people like Jacob Bronowski that'd be good. I realise that there are rather few of these people around, but they do exist.
Not just a bunch of idiots, but it always seems to be that more democracy equals more cost. We think the Lords and their expenses are bad, wait until it is stuffed full of professional elected politicians, rather than some washed up / failed ones, a load of business types and some old fuddy duddies claiming their dining allowance, I bet you any money it ends up that this senate comes with a substantial remuneration package (otherwise obviously we wont get the quality...yeah right...).
I disagree, we have had plenty of evidence that Ed Miliband isn't even up to being Leader of the Labour party, never mind the PM of the country. Miliband has even failed to connect with Labour voters, that is why he personal rating in the polls are so poor right now.
Didn't see the "man gives money to a homeless person" bombshell on the news anywhere.
Perhaps the dismal PBTories/SamCoates/Guido rabble got a little silly. Again.
Ed M is almost fortunate in that while many people may suspect he is going to be crap, we don't have definitive proof no matter how man awkward photos and poor ideas are stated, not until he is actually PM.
Or he could be a sheer genius at expectation management. From what I read if his asshole's perpendicular he's exceeding expectations.
Would Citizen Khan be racist if it was exactly the same, except all the Asian parts were played by white actors in make-up?
Man - "How was Pakistan?" Citizen Khan - "Just like Birmingham, only less Pakistanis!"
Isn't that racist? Hello?
It should be fewer...
You could construe "I hate Pakis" as racist.
Merely commenting on their geographic distribution is hardly racist.
I beg to differ.
Most "Pakistanis" in Birmingham re, of course, British nationals, either by duration of stay or birth. Refer to their ethnicity or religion if you must, but they're as British as I am.
Which cricket team do they support?
Just asking for a friend.
How would I know?
For the record, I support England at cricket, but Italy at soccer.
In a few years people will look back at Citizen Khan with the same jawdropping expression as we do when we watch the Black an White Minstrel show, or It Aint Half Hot Mum.
But even though it is total crap, it is still better than Mrs Browns Boys which is a form of torture suitable only for a pit in Hell.
Would Citizen Khan be racist if it was exactly the same, except all the Asian parts were played by white actors in make-up?
Man - "How was Pakistan?" Citizen Khan - "Just like Birmingham, only less Pakistanis!"
Isn't that racist? Hello?
It should be fewer...
You could construe "I hate Pakis" as racist.
Merely commenting on their geographic distribution is hardly racist.
I beg to differ.
Most "Pakistanis" in Birmingham re, of course, British nationals, either by duration of stay or birth. Refer to their ethnicity or religion if you must, but they're as British as I am.
Which cricket team do they support?
Just asking for a friend.
How would I know?
For the record, I support England at cricket, but Italy at soccer.
In a few years people will look back at Citizen Khan with the same jawdropping expression as we do when we watch the Black an White Minstrel show, or It Aint Half Hot Mum.
But even though it is total crap, it is still better than Mrs Browns Boys which is a form of torture suitable only for a pit in Hell.
Mum approves of It Ain't Half Hot Mum so it can't have been too bad
I can just remember watching repeats back in the 80s.
In a few years people will look back at Citizen Khan with the same jawdropping expression as we do when we watch the Black an White Minstrel show, or It Aint Half Hot Mum.
But even though it is total crap, it is still better than Mrs Browns Boys which is a form of torture suitable only for a pit in Hell.
From what I remember of Love Thy Neighbor the white guy was a socialist and the black guy was a conservative. It was amazingly popular at the time.
In a few years people will look back at Citizen Khan with the same jawdropping expression as we do when we watch the Black an White Minstrel show, or It Aint Half Hot Mum.
But even though it is total crap, it is still better than Mrs Browns Boys which is a form of torture suitable only for a pit in Hell.
Mum approves of It Ain't Half Hot Mum so it can't have been too bad
I can just remember watching repeats back in the 80s.
It wasn't bad really. I watched a couple of episodes recently.
I disagree, we have had plenty of evidence that Ed Miliband isn't even up to being Leader of the Labour party, never mind the PM of the country. Miliband has even failed to connect with Labour voters, that is why he personal rating in the polls are so poor right now.
Didn't see the "man gives money to a homeless person" bombshell on the news anywhere.
Perhaps the dismal PBTories/SamCoates/Guido rabble got a little silly. Again.
Ed M is almost fortunate in that while many people may suspect he is going to be crap, we don't have definitive proof no matter how man awkward photos and poor ideas are stated, not until he is actually PM.
It seems to me that it's more Labour's problem than Ed's. Look on Betfair and see how many people are possible next Labour leaders - it compares very poorly with the LDs and Tories. I'm a Tory voter, so I'm going to be a bit critical anyway, but it seems to me that Labour are something of a morbid force.
The open space on the left of politics is absolutely enormous - everyone has done the right wing thinking - we sort of know about market economics now - we sort of know it's good, and we sort of know that there's an ache for something better.
Just one good thought from Labour could change everything.
That applies to all political parties to a lesser extent too.
When read carefully, it is more about shoring up power than distributing it.
That may be the BBC spin!
A brave decision from Ed.
I suspect it's not entirely been thought through. Does the statement "It cannot be right that the North West has almost the same population as London but only a small fraction of London's number of peers." refer to where the peers were born or where they live for example?
The problem with an elected second chamber is I'm sure we'd get a bunch of idiots. I don't like the current system at all - we get dreadful people placed in positions of power - Baronesses Warsi and Vadera for example. They were both put there because they helped their parties gender and ethnic credentials. (Please feel free to shoot me down on this - I have only a passing acquaintance with either of these lady's abilities - however they've both struck me as placeholders)
I'd like a second chamber filled with the wise. For example if we could enlist people like Jacob Bronowski that'd be good. I realise that there are rather few of these people around, but they do exist.
It could be made less expensive by having *far* fewer members.
I've not seen Miliband's proposals in detail but about 150 elected senators should suffice. If he's basing them on the Euro-constituencies, then I'd suggest an average of three per constituency, elected in thirds every three years i.e. a renewable 9-year term.
Added to which, up to 10 Life Senators, to be elected by the whole House and requiring the support of two-thirds of all members, and no more than two elected in any one 3-year session.
When read carefully, it is more about shoring up power than distributing it.
That may be the BBC spin!
A brave decision from Ed.
I suspect it's not entirely been thought through. Does the statement "It cannot be right that the North West has almost the same population as London but only a small fraction of London's number of peers." refer to where the peers were born or where they live for example?
The problem with an elected second chamber is I'm sure we'd get a bunch of idiots. I don't like the current system at all - we get dreadful people placed in positions of power - Baronesses Warsi and Vadera for example. They were both put there because they helped their parties gender and ethnic credentials. (Please feel free to shoot me down on this - I have only a passing acquaintance with either of these lady's abilities - however they've both struck me as placeholders)
I'd like a second chamber filled with the wise. For example if we could enlist people like Jacob Bronowski that'd be good. I realise that there are rather few of these people around, but they do exist.
It could be made less expensive by having *far* fewer members.
I've not seen Miliband's proposals in detail but about 150 elected senators should suffice. If he's basing them on the Euro-constituencies, then I'd suggest an average of three per constituency, elected in thirds every three years i.e. a renewable 9-year term.
Added to which, up to 10 Life Senators, to be elected by the whole House and requiring the support of two-thirds of all members, and no more than two elected in any one 3-year session.
Lets call it 100.
Perhaps add to the second chamber some debating members - advocates if you like. Membership of (say) 200. Advocates are elected (by Eds system), but the voting members aren't.
In the unlikely event I'm called upon to restructure the pillars of our governance then I'll surely consult you too
I disagree, we have had plenty of evidence that Ed Miliband isn't even up to being Leader of the Labour party, never mind the PM of the country. Miliband has even failed to connect with Labour voters, that is why he personal rating in the polls are so poor right now.
Didn't see the "man gives money to a homeless person" bombshell on the news anywhere.
Perhaps the dismal PBTories/SamCoates/Guido rabble got a little silly. Again.
Ed M is almost fortunate in that while many people may suspect he is going to be crap, we don't have definitive proof no matter how man awkward photos and poor ideas are stated, not until he is actually PM.
It seems to me that it's more Labour's problem than Ed's. Look on Betfair and see how many people are possible next Labour leaders - it compares very poorly with the LDs and Tories. I'm a Tory voter, so I'm going to be a bit critical anyway, but it seems to me that Labour are something of a morbid force.
The open space on the left of politics is absolutely enormous - everyone has done the right wing thinking - we sort of know about market economics now - we sort of know it's good, and we sort of know that there's an ache for something better.
Just one good thought from Labour could change everything.
That applies to all political parties to a lesser extent too.
This post demonstrates no understanding of the market.
When read carefully, it is more about shoring up power than distributing it.
That may be the BBC spin!
A brave decision from Ed.
I suspect it's not entirely been thought through. Does the statement "It cannot be right that the North West has almost the same population as London but only a small fraction of London's number of peers." refer to where the peers were born or where they live for example?
The problem with an elected second chamber is I'm sure we'd get a bunch of idiots. I don't like the current system at all - we get dreadful people placed in positions of power - Baronesses Warsi and Vadera for example. They were both put there because they helped their parties gender and ethnic credentials. (Please feel free to shoot me down on this - I have only a passing acquaintance with either of these lady's abilities - however they've both struck me as placeholders)
I'd like a second chamber filled with the wise. For example if we could enlist people like Jacob Bronowski that'd be good. I realise that there are rather few of these people around, but they do exist.
It could be made less expensive by having *far* fewer members.
I've not seen Miliband's proposals in detail but about 150 elected senators should suffice. If he's basing them on the Euro-constituencies, then I'd suggest an average of three per constituency, elected in thirds every three years i.e. a renewable 9-year term.
Added to which, up to 10 Life Senators, to be elected by the whole House and requiring the support of two-thirds of all members, and no more than two elected in any one 3-year session.
Is Ed nicking my ideas - I mentioned changing the parliament to an English STV elected thingamajiggy earlier in the day !
In a few years people will look back at Citizen Khan with the same jawdropping expression as we do when we watch the Black an White Minstrel show, or It Aint Half Hot Mum.
But even though it is total crap, it is still better than Mrs Browns Boys which is a form of torture suitable only for a pit in Hell.
From what I remember of Love Thy Neighbor the white guy was a socialist and the black guy was a conservative. It was amazingly popular at the time.
And either the black guy won, or they both ended up looking stupid in front of their long-suffering wives. We used to love it as kids.
I disagree, we have had plenty of evidence that Ed Miliband isn't even up to being Leader of the Labour party, never mind the PM of the country. Miliband has even failed to connect with Labour voters, that is why he personal rating in the polls are so poor right now.
Didn't see the "man gives money to a homeless person" bombshell on the news anywhere.
Perhaps the dismal PBTories/SamCoates/Guido rabble got a little silly. Again.
Ed M is almost fortunate in that while many people may suspect he is going to be crap, we don't have definitive proof no matter how man awkward photos and poor ideas are stated, not until he is actually PM.
It seems to me that it's more Labour's problem than Ed's. Look on Betfair and see how many people are possible next Labour leaders - it compares very poorly with the LDs and Tories. I'm a Tory voter, so I'm going to be a bit critical anyway, but it seems to me that Labour are something of a morbid force.
The open space on the left of politics is absolutely enormous - everyone has done the right wing thinking - we sort of know about market economics now - we sort of know it's good, and we sort of know that there's an ache for something better.
Just one good thought from Labour could change everything.
That applies to all political parties to a lesser extent too.
This post demonstrates no understanding of the market.
When read carefully, it is more about shoring up power than distributing it.
I'd like a second chamber filled with the wise. For example if we could enlist people like Jacob Bronowski that'd be good. I realise that there are rather few of these people around, but they do exist.
Second Chamber by Seance! Who else from the departed should we have?
(Best description I've read of the post Thatcher Tory party was Richard Vinen's describing it as a "deranged seance"! Are you there, Margaret? Do you have a message for us Margaret? One knock for yes, two knocks for no!)
When read carefully, it is more about shoring up power than distributing it.
I'd like a second chamber filled with the wise. For example if we could enlist people like Jacob Bronowski that'd be good. I realise that there are rather few of these people around, but they do exist.
Second Chamber by Seance! Who else from the departed should we have?
(Best description I've read of the post Thatcher Tory party was Richard Vinen's describing it as a "deranged seance"! Are you there, Margaret? Do you have a message for us Margaret? One knock for yes, two knocks for no!)
Fair enough. That was of course what I was trying to avoid in saying who was or wasn't worthy.
There are living people I admire, but I certainly won't tell you that you should admire them too.
Con: Michael Fallon Lab: Chris Clark LD: Alan Bullion UKIP: Steve Lindsay Greens: Amelie Boleyn
UKIP's task in Sevenoaks will be to beat the Lib Dems into second.
UKIP came top in Sevenoaks in the euro elections in May - the first time the Tories haven't won a set of elections there since 1923. Lindsay's a good candidate.
The Swanley part of the constituency is good old-fashioned WWC Labour, which might go for the purples.
Fallon's recent 'swamped' comment was delivered to give the Tories a bit of dog-whistle traction on immigration, but also to help himself in his own constituency, which is next to the Medway towns and not a million miles from Rochester & Strood.
Who would you suggest as a person that embodies what we might want from a Senate anyway? I think it's rather hard to find anyone that isn't sharply political.
And if there was another actual Indy Referendum tomorrow, it would be another No vote in the same areas for exactly the same reasons these Scots voted No just a few weeks ago.
Con: Michael Fallon Lab: Chris Clark LD: Alan Bullion UKIP: Steve Lindsay Greens: Amelie Boleyn
UKIP's task in Sevenoaks will be to beat the Lib Dems into second.
UKIP came top in Sevenoaks in the euro elections in May - the first time the Tories haven't won a set of elections there since 1923. Lindsay's a good candidate.
The Swanley part of the constituency is good old-fashioned WWC Labour, which might go for the purples.
Fallon's recent 'swamped' comment was delivered to give the Tories a bit of dog-whistle traction on immigration, but also to help himself in his own constituency, which is next to the Medway towns and not a million miles from Rochester & Strood.
Thanks for the overview.
I was going to say I haven't been to the constituency but actually I have visited Churchill's country house which might just be in the seat.
Con: Michael Fallon Lab: Chris Clark LD: Alan Bullion UKIP: Steve Lindsay Greens: Amelie Boleyn
UKIP's task in Sevenoaks will be to beat the Lib Dems into second.
UKIP came top in Sevenoaks in the euro elections in May - the first time the Tories haven't won a set of elections there since 1923. Lindsay's a good candidate.
The Swanley part of the constituency is good old-fashioned WWC Labour, which might go for the purples.
Fallon's recent 'swamped' comment was delivered to give the Tories a bit of dog-whistle traction on immigration, but also to help himself in his own constituency, which is next to the Medway towns and not a million miles from Rochester & Strood.
Thanks for the overview.
I was going to say I haven't been to the constituency but actually I have visited Churchill's country house which might just be in the seat.
Chartwell is indeed in the southwest of the constituency, in Westerham. Also in the constituency is Knole House, where the Beatles did their thing (already mentioned on this thread), and Chevening House, which is the grace and favour residence of the foreign secretary (though due to the Coalition, split at the moment between Hague and Clegg).
As Tory as it gets, in short, but the Lib Dems and Labour get a few. Will be interesting to see where the Lib Dem vote goes - Tory, Labour, maybe even a bit to UKIP. Or it might hold up of course...
Comments
When investigating allegations against the establishment concerning sexual abuse in a variety of settings there is simply not going to be someone nominated by the establishment who has not been tainted by it.
The backlash to his article was far wider than some little Englanders and the Daily Mail.
I believe the expression of when in a hole stop digging is rather fitting.
For the record, I support England at cricket, but Italy at soccer.
A brave decision from Ed.
I suspect it's not entirely been thought through. Does the statement "It cannot be right that the North West has almost the same population as London but only a small fraction of London's number of peers." refer to where the peers were born or where they live for example?
The problem with an elected second chamber is I'm sure we'd get a bunch of idiots. I don't like the current system at all - we get dreadful people placed in positions of power - Baronesses Warsi and Vadera for example. They were both put there because they helped their parties gender and ethnic credentials. (Please feel free to shoot me down on this - I have only a passing acquaintance with either of these lady's abilities - however they've both struck me as placeholders)
I'd like a second chamber filled with the wise. For example if we could enlist people like Jacob Bronowski that'd be good. I realise that there are rather few of these people around, but they do exist.
http://www.rottentomatoes.com/m/mrs_browns_boys_dmovie/
But even though it is total crap, it is still better than Mrs Browns Boys which is a form of torture suitable only for a pit in Hell.
I can just remember watching repeats back in the 80s.
The open space on the left of politics is absolutely enormous - everyone has done the right wing thinking - we sort of know about market economics now - we sort of know it's good, and we sort of know that there's an ache for something better.
Just one good thought from Labour could change everything.
That applies to all political parties to a lesser extent too.
Watching Sky News paper review where they just mentioned it.
I've not seen Miliband's proposals in detail but about 150 elected senators should suffice. If he's basing them on the Euro-constituencies, then I'd suggest an average of three per constituency, elected in thirds every three years i.e. a renewable 9-year term.
Added to which, up to 10 Life Senators, to be elected by the whole House and requiring the support of two-thirds of all members, and no more than two elected in any one 3-year session.
http://electionsetc.com/2014/10/31/forecast-update-31-october-2014/#more-631
Perhaps add to the second chamber some debating members - advocates if you like. Membership of (say) 200. Advocates are elected (by Eds system), but the voting members aren't.
In the unlikely event I'm called upon to restructure the pillars of our governance then I'll surely consult you too
Lab 33.1 (-0.3)
Con 32.4 (+0.1)
UKIP 16.0 (+0.1)
LD 7.6 (+0.2)
Lab lead 0.7 (-0.4)
Changes from the first ELBOW published on 17 August:
Lab -3.1
Con -0.8
UKIP +2.9
LD -1.2
Lab lead -2.3 (ie. was 3.0, now 0.7)
(Best description I've read of the post Thatcher Tory party was Richard Vinen's describing it as a "deranged seance"! Are you there, Margaret? Do you have a message for us Margaret? One knock for yes, two knocks for no!)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8xoFOJ5-_hE
There are living people I admire, but I certainly won't tell you that you should admire them too.
UKIP came top in Sevenoaks in the euro elections in May - the first time the Tories haven't won a set of elections there since 1923. Lindsay's a good candidate.
The Swanley part of the constituency is good old-fashioned WWC Labour, which might go for the purples.
Fallon's recent 'swamped' comment was delivered to give the Tories a bit of dog-whistle traction on immigration, but also to help himself in his own constituency, which is next to the Medway towns and not a million miles from Rochester & Strood.
Who would you suggest as a person that embodies what we might want from a Senate anyway? I think it's rather hard to find anyone that isn't sharply political.
D.Mill and Hague - I'd go with them.
New Scottish independence poll(!!) gives 52% Yes, 48% No. Fairly hefty swing since the referendum.
http://www.thetimes.co.uk/tto/news/uk/scotland/article4254721.ece
I was going to say I haven't been to the constituency but actually I have visited Churchill's country house which might just be in the seat.
As Tory as it gets, in short, but the Lib Dems and Labour get a few. Will be interesting to see where the Lib Dem vote goes - Tory, Labour, maybe even a bit to UKIP. Or it might hold up of course...
There are two UKIP on the council: Steve Lindsay, who is now UKIP's PPC for Sevenoaks, and another who defected to UKIP after Carswell did.http://www.ukip.org/first_tory_councillor_to_defect_to_ukip_due_to_carswell