Reader comments · Baroness Barker: The House of Lords showed its spirit, relevance and understanding by voting for equal marriage · PinkNews

Enter your email address to receive our daily LGBT news roundup

You're free to unsubscribe at any time.


Baroness Barker: The House of Lords showed its spirit, relevance and understanding by voting for equal marriage

Post your comment

Comments on this article are now closed.

Reader comments

  1. Well she would say that wouldn’t she?

    While I am happy the Bill has passed, the very fact that the unelected Upper House STILL has the potential to pervert democracy, means that it is a very sinister and dangerous House.

    It needs to be replaced by a democratically elected Upper House immediately.

    1. Robert in S. Kensington 4 Jun 2013, 8:00pm

      I agree with an elected Upper Chamber but….would that herald the end of the Parliament Act? The only reason it exists is because of the unelected part of the House.

      1. Possibly.

        But is that so important?

        The Parliament Act exists merely to limit the power of the unelected House of Lords to block Commons legislation.

        With an elected Upper House then the need for such an act is massively reduced as both houses would have a democratic mandate.

        The House of Lords as it currently stands has zero democratic mandate. That is unacceptable no matter what way you slice it.

      2. In my view an ideal end the House of Lords would be for the Commons to vote to fully reform the House of Lords to turn it into an elected Upper House; for the Lords to reject the Bill, and for the Commons to use the Parliament Act to over-rule them.

        That would be a fitting end to our disgustngly undemocratic current situation.

        1. Midnighter 4 Jun 2013, 9:58pm

          Totally agree SteveC. No mandate and no accountability.

  2. I would agree with her. There were some pretty disagreeable things said over the last two days, but all from the usual suspects, the Catholic and Christian Concern lobby and a few old hereditary hangers on, but the pro speeches came from all quarters, all ages, political persuasions and faiths, speaking from the heart and from experience and without having to look over their shoulders at what voters may think of them. And they are clearly in the majority.

  3. Jacob Dugan-Brause 4 Jun 2013, 8:07pm

    Listening to the future. Yes, that is precisely what happened. My congratulations to the ‘other house’ for a very good and right vote today.

    But may I just call you Ms. Barker, dear friend?

    1. She can still be a Baroness if she so wishes.

      There is nothing stopping her changing her name to Baroness by deed poll.

  4. Yes, some frightful things have been said about us over the past two days, but look at what we’ve gained: Liz Barker has come out! Well done!

    Let’s not now just forget which peers said frightful things about us. Everybody has to be made to pay for evil in this world. They must not get away with it. Their simply not having won is not good enough punishment for the evil they have spoken against us.

    Remember them! Keep a list handy!

    1. What good is that going to do?

      The House of Lords is accountable to nobody – least of all the electorate of this country.

      Ms Barker is part of the problem of the defecit of democracy in this country.

  5. Today the the House of Lords demonstrated that contrary to the expectations of all the bolsheviks nashing their teeth on this website and whining how awful the Lords are, given the thumping majority in favour of equal marriage (larger than that of the Commons) and many very good and sensible speeches from all political parties, most of its members are very well informed and very much in tune with public opinion.

    The Lords has been reformed on several occasions and it is now in pretty good shape as a very useful body in the law-making process – so long may it continue!

    1. Midnighter 5 Jun 2013, 10:47am

      Yes, there are “good guys” in the house of Lords, yet still we are at the mercy of a House that is not demographically representative, and allows rabid nutters like Knight and Dear and the rest to attempt to impose values that are more akin to their caricatures in a Spitting Image sketch than those held in wider society.

      The Lords dodged wholesale abolition of hereditary peerage only by blackmailing the government of the time with a blockade on progressing any legislature. The only reason any “reform” was achieved was due to a game of brinkmanship. Suggesting that what we now have is anything other than a compromise against the democratic will would be inaccurate.

      Several peers noted that opposing a strongly supported bill would be a risk for the House; I’d prefer a much clearer accountability than vague concerns. In the real world the risk of getting fired tends to sharpen minds.

      Great, its not as broken as it was, I agree. It should still work a lot better in my view.

These comments are un-moderated and do not necessarily represent the views of PinkNews. If you believe that a comment is inappropriate or libellous, please contact us.