Seems like the House of Lords is doing some good:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/4616356.stm

Can't fault them for that, but they still shouldn't exist.

Um, Mat--would you mind translating "sozzled"?

SPEAK ENGLISH, DAMN YOU!!! ;-) ;-)

g/d/r

P.S. Life looking a bit better today?

Quiet woman. Before we resubsume you back into the empire.

Duffers? As in golfers?
Oh, and Colm: I, for one, welcome our new British overlords.

Underpaid, undersexed, and--oh, never mind...

Sozzled -- drunk, but not incapacitated.
Duffer -- someone or something that has the quality of being duff.
Duff -- useless, junk, rubbish.

Mat: Ah. That makes sense. I've "sozzled" cookies in milk, but not to the point where they fall apart. Thanks for the vocabulary lesson.

I guess the two uses of the word have a similar root -- a sense of "soaked in liquid"... :)

> Underpaid, undersexed, and--oh, never mind...

And ain't going anywhere.

Sorry Colm, but I have never understood how an election process somehow confers legitimacy. It's like whoever shouts the loudest wins, only on a grand scale. The resulting decision is rarely any better arrived at.

An election process isn't a very good democratic process, but that's still better than no democratic process at all.

Often the decisions aren't better than an autocratic process, but that's not really the point. The real, CRUCIAL point is that when the shit REALLY hits the fan you can kick the bastards who caused it out of power.

Too bad we can't really throw a judge out of power.

You can probably stop giving him cases.

That's why the Lords is a reforming house, if the Commons push it then whatever it is gets passed but the reforming and the time that adds to the process does surprisingly make for better laws.

Usually.

Disagreeing with judges is like disagreeing with doctors, interesting to do but in the end usually fatuous.

So Colm, how would you implement a "Don't be such a prat, think it through" function in a legislative body?

I agree if we were starting with a blank slate the noble lords wouldn't be something we'd invent - but experience has taught me to be careful about mucking about too much with things that actually work.

Sorry Colm, I tend to agree with the others. Once in the house of lords since you ain't bound to the party to get favours you can become an awkward cuss.
Since most of the Life peers got chucked out it's not a bad system.
As a chamber to delay poor legislation I like it.
By the same token, much as I don't like some of my MPs politics (Frank Dobson) since he isn't beholden to the Vicar anymore he isn't afraid to oppose the Vicar over civil rights, when I remember I use the faxyourmp website to send over my thoughts (last time over the 90 day detention stuff)

"Disagreeing with judges is like disagreeing with doctors, interesting to do but in the end usually fatuous."

It's much easier to punish a doctor.