January 19, 2006
Tally ho here we go
And so it begins:
Ministers complain that the upper chamber is exceeding its powers by daring to oppose what was a specific election manifesto commitment and which the government, as a result, is mandated to introduce.Like I said, any growing reaction against such social control must come from the commons. The Lords, if one is to judge the use of the parliament act by precedent, must be as ineffective from the point of view of the lover of liberty as the ban of fox hunting must surely be from the point of view of the fox.
The Lords now claim a strengthened legitimacy since the house was reformed by New Labour and opposition parties are even suggesting that manifesto pledges are also fair game for the reformed Lords.
None of this matters in the end game. The Lords and it's legitimacy has not changed for the better since the parliament act was used to force through the ban on hunting with hounds. There can be no hushed tones, looks of surprise and expressions of indignant outrage when the government again uses the act for what can only be reasonably judged as more important issues.
