Why should anybody get paid £300 per day for sleeping? The term of a "life peerage" should be defined as lasting as long as you can stay awake while on the benches. Anyone caught dozing should be stripped of their peerage. Why not? It would happen in any other job. The House of Lords was reformed under Tony Blair but the result was as big a mess as everything else done in the Blair era. The Lords is now just a racket for rewarding retired politicians or donors to political parties who have never even stood for election.
They constantly complain that they don't get enough money when what they can claim in expenses is far above the average salary.
We cannot vote them out, which means that the LibDems are vastly over-represented in proportion to voting patterns, and Brexit supporters are vastly under-represented.
The Lords behaved irresponsibly by passing an amendment in favour of guaranteeing the rights of EU citizens working in the UK without yet having a signed agreement to guarantee the rights of UK citizens living and working in EU countries. It is a foolish and thoughtless thing to do. Over and over again the people who pushed it repeated the mantra that "EU citizens are not bargaining chips".
But no one is saying that they are "chips". The point is that both groups involved in this situation must be considered equally and simultaneously. When you negotiate a deal, whether it is for importing goods, or for investment, or for employment, or even just for booking a holiday, you ensure that the interests of both sides are taken into consideration in a balanced way before any binding commitments are made. That does not mean the people are "chips" to use the idiotic phrase that keeps on and on being bandied about. It means they are people involved in a BI-lateral negotiation. The Lords want to make a UNI-lateral (or Loony-lateral) agreement that leaves our own citizens stranded, at the mercy of EU bureaucrats who will undoubtedly use them as bargaining chips. The people who have wrung every penny out of this long-suffering country for thirty years and bled us dry, cannot be trusted.
I am happy to hear that the Government does not have to accept the Lords' foolish and perverse amendment. I hope it is binned as soon as possible. The House of Lords is less useful now than it was when peers were hereditary. The hereditary peers never did anything I disagreed with. Now the Lords is full of horrid specimens like Peter Mandelson, the Kinnocks times two, Cathy Ashton, and so on, who all pocketed multi-millions from the EU. They are also contractually bound never to criticize or oppose the EU, on pain of losing their fat pensions. They don't need the handsome expenses the Lords pays them - they are already filthy rich - and their loyalties are not to this country. There are plenty of others getting subsidies, salaries, and backhanders from the EU in one way or another. They should not be allowed to vote on the Brexit Bill. They have got too much vested interest.
Behind their lordships' ermine robes lurk some very unsavoury and corrupt people such as Grenville Jenner who should have been in jail, not Parliament,
The House of Lords has been described as the most expensive geriatric care-home in England. I don't agree with some of the anti--elderly language I have heard about them, but I do think it is time to kick most of them out. They will probably have to be replaced with an elected body. As a matter of fact, there are arguments for having a hereditary peerage, but that is another question altogether. It is not the policy of the English Democrats, and most people in this country would probably prefer to force members of the upper house to seek election. Whatever else, we must stop paying them £300 per day for just dozing on the benches. That is a scandal.