COMMONWEALTH PARTY
OF AMERICA


Flag of the American Commonwealth Republics





U.K. Senate Proposal






With compromised or unaccountable governments inducing instabilities such as pension protests in France, truck protests in Canada, overzealous lockdowns in New Zealand and Australia, farm confiscations in the Netherlands, sharia takeover in Sweden, chaos across the southern U.S. border and invasive boat traffic coming over the English Channel to the Brexit-less U.K. -- we get a sense of breakdown that needs to be addressed in the institutions of governance.


One complaint in this regard is the oversized and non-representative House of Lords in the U.K. which has been the subject of various attempts at reform over the years. To such end we sent a message to the House of Commons to suggest a replacement for the House of Lords which would be a U.K. Senate that has its members appointed somewhat like the original U.S. Senate had. A general outline was given with the appointment of senators done by the elected governments of the various sub-kingdoms and counties or 'nations and regions' as referenced in some of the original reform efforts espoused by U.K. sources.


Appointments done by those elected governments serving as indirect elections for a senate would be an alternative to having the redundancy of another directly elected house. We suggested a staggered approach to filling in the kingdom senate rosters in order to avoid abrupt change across a delegation akin to how the U.S. Senate has 1/3 of the senators chosen every two years. Such approach does call for figuring out a nuance to how best reflect a new average power balance amongst the incoming parties within a nation for the interim period between the direct elections concerning their home parliaments. We leave it to the citizens of the U.K. to determine the final form if they wish to build on this plan:





Greetings U.K. MPs,


There has been a noticeable call to reform or abolish the House of Lords in recent years. One latest example is the Brexit types who see it as a total hindrance to the will of the people. Whether Brexit or not, there has been expressed dissatisfaction with having a house that is unelected and seen as thwarting the representative governance of your nation. That appears to be a valid complaint based on some Lords apparent motives in such instances, yet nonetheless in actuality you do need a house whose members are appointed since having two popularly elected houses is redundant and lacks a check on the reflective impulses of the populace. Also, having too many elected offices makes it more cumbersome for the people to keep up on them and properly vet all the issues and candidates which leads to low-information voting where constituents elect an inconsistent set of overall officeholders who govern with contradictions. It would be better to let the populace concentrate their national-level voting in fewer races towards one house and then have that resulting government contain adjoined, appointed officials from lower governments which will better carry out the intentions of the electorate. Plus having a set of national legislators who are not subject to the pandering of public campaigns contains {isolates and limits elsewhere} such undesirable side-effects to one house unlike what the now popularly elected U.S. Senate exhibits through an additive collection of statewide races invoked in 1913.


In consideration of all those issues, replacing the Lords with a U.K. Senate whose members are appointed would retain a check against impulsiveness yet the members would be appointed by the sub-kingdoms or "states" and the county governments. Based on the U.K. having almost 100 official counties (97), the U.K. Senate (maybe total about 200 members) would have half of its seats (near 100) appointed by the (some to be) parliaments of England, Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland at about 25 seats for each (& if a sub-kingdom of Cornwall at about 20 each) all in a rough proportional representation to the {their respective} parliament make-up. The sub-kingdoms or states would thus have equal weight given them on that side of the body. The other half of the U.K. Senate (near 100) would have each one of its seats appointed by a county (or metro) government. The sub-kingdom or "state" parliamentary senators would serve a five-year term and the county senators a four-year term with each type having to stay out of the senate at least two consecutive terms thereafter. Before a successive senate term they shall have stayed out of all public offices for the length of their proposed term and they will serve no more than two full senate terms with a possible two-year partial. Similar limits should occur in the Commons so that all MPs will live under the laws they pass. To favor a long-term continuity/stability approach, the state parliamentary senators within each sub-kingdom roster would be replaced at a rate of five seats per annum spaced equally apart.


If the number of all your actual functioning counties or districts is not so near equal in number to the proposed 100 or so seats allotted for the sub-kingdom parliaments, you can just treat both sides of the senate aisle as two separate houses when it comes time to tally floor votes making it so that all legislation has to pass by a majority on both sides of the aisle which gives them equality in power even though the number of their seats is different. As well, you could reserve such condition to only certain types of legislation like say budget or civic issues. On the debate floor and benches however, they would function as one house.


All of these appointed senators qualify as being indirectly elected since the populace elects its county governments and sub-kingdom parliaments who during their own campaigns will indicate the type or indicate the particular individuals they will appoint as senators on the population's behalf. With a senate structure as described, legislation from the Commons gets approval through a second house wherein the sub-kingdoms are given equal say to each other on one side of the aisle and the counties of each sub-kingdom approve on the other. So the interests of both the county governments and sub-kingdom parliaments would weigh in on national legislation. The relative size of the U.K. Senate to the Commons could resemble the ratio of the respective Canadian houses in their parliament assuming a 200 seat total.


Another role for the monarchy: In lieu of approving Lords compensate the king, queen or sitting sovereign's powers in other areas like in the choosing of certain diplomats, consuls and judges in a check-and-balance fashion while keeping {they keep} total administrative control over royal properties. Their throne as head of state can include also-powers to call forth the police and reserves in order to quell insurrections or handle national disasters and to call immediate military or intelligence actions while the PM and Parliament have power to declare an overall state of war for the long term. Such monarchial powers could commence requisite to some level of education or X amount of public service.



Thanks for your time again in reviewing this proposal.





ADDENDUM: For the single-seat component of mixed-member proportional representation (MMPR) it is best to use range/score voting:

https://electionscience.org/library/score-voting/















-Top- -Sources- -Bottom-










*anchor for 'Sources'*







SOURCES:




'The second chamber of Parliament is steeped in an eventful history which has shaped today's House. Here are some key dates in the evolution of the Lords.'

https://www.parliament.uk/business/lords/lords-history/history-of-the-lords/




'But the Tory group in the Lords, as with the other parties, is heavily dominated by those with political connections. This includes almost 100 Conservative ex-MPs, booted into what many speak of as a “retirement home” where they are guaranteed a £300-plus daily allowance for turning up, and 34 former special advisers and ex-party officials.'

'More than half are politically connected people, about two in 10 are hereditary peers and the remaining tranche are from other walks of life – heavily skewed towards financiers and thinktanks.'

'Certainly, there are the 184 crossbenchers, many proposed by the House of Lords appointments commission, but they make up less than a quarter of the House of Lords. Then there are the 25 bishops – despite England and Wales being no longer majority Christian nations.' ~ Betsy Reed | Thu 29 Dec 2022 12.00 EST

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2022/dec/29/donors-cronies-lackeys-case-abolish-lords-reform-labour-boris-johnson




'First, abolition would not be wise. To remove the House of Lords and replace it with nothing would leave the House of Commons as our sole parliamentary check on the government’s power..........Without such opportunities for second thought, government decisions would inevitably be more rushed and likely often regretted later. These dynamics explain why many of the world’s largest and longest-established democracies also have second chambers—among them the US, France, Germany, Canada, Australia and Japan.'

'There are many potential ways in which a reformed second chamber could represent the nations and regions—for example, the Australian and US Senates are directly elected by voters in the states; the Austrian and South African second chambers are elected by sub-national legislatures; the German Bundesrat represents state governments and the Canadian Senate is appointed on a provincial basis. Proposals in the last 20 years have tended to suggest direct election in nations and regions, along with some appointed members.'

'Notably, dissatisfaction with the appointments process did not necessarily drive support for an elected alternative to the Lords—respondents were equally split between supporting election and appointment. Those seeking to overhaul the House of Lords need to take into account the need for public buy-in for reform.' ~ Meg Russell | November 24, 2022

https://www.prospectmagazine.co.uk/politics/60267/why-abolishing-the-house-of-lords-is-not-the-answer




'And no other country in the democratic world has a second chamber bigger than ours. Globally, only Communist China has a bigger body, and they merely meet to rubber stamp government policies. France manages on 348 members. Spain with 265. India, with over a billion people, and Japan have just 245 members each.'

'In 2022, the House of Lords is dominated by London, the South East and East of England, with a majority of peers (55%) for whom we have a place of residence living in these three regions (more than 250 peers refuse to state the area they live in). By contrast, peers in the East and West Midlands make up just over six percent between them – leaving many areas of the UK woefully underrepresented.'

'The average age in the Lords is 70, and while Lords were recently been given the ability to retire, they can sit in the Lords for the rest of their life. Female representation in the Lords has only recently reached 28 percent.'

https://www.electoral-reform.org.uk/campaigns/elected-house-of-lords/




Labour unveil plans to abolish the House of Lords | Channel 4 News

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dlfIrAXTbRo













-Top- -Sources- -Bottom-














Commonwealth Party
U.K. Senate Proposal
May 19, 2023