So, when can we say goodbye to the Lords?

98 years ago the British government made a decision to reform the upper house of parliament, the House of Lords. Today we awake to the news that finally the lower house, the House of Commons, has voted by a majority of 113, to make the upper chamber fully elected. So, it might seem that the UK is a step closer to becoming a proper democracy.

Well, over the years our "democratically elected" government has made many decisions, many of which had a large majority, only to be swept under the carpet. The British government decided about 150 years ago to adopt the metric system of measurements yet it took until the 1970's to actually start the process, something that has yet to be finished, so on that basis we could be waiting for another 30 years before we start to see any real movement on this.

So, what is the problem? As I've said here before, the UK is one of those strange political animals, it's something called a "Constitutional Monarchy". I'm no expert but I believe that this basically means that there is an elected government, but that government only manages the country on behalf of the reigning monarch who can assert their power at will at any time they see fit. "It's worked well for hundreds of years" you might say, "If it's not broken, don't fix it" I hear. Well, this is the 21st century and we're brought up to believe we live in a true democracy in the UK when we actually don't.

There are several problems with our current system.

The Monarchy: Many would argue that under the most recent monarchs that the UK has done rather well. This may well be the case on the outside, but we live in a world where kings and queens are seen more as celebrities than having actual power when the disturbing truth is that these people can really do as they please. She hasn't done it and probably won't, but our queen could take goods from a supermarket shelf without paying, she can break the speed limit, even commit murder, and would have full immunity from prosecution on the simple grounds that the courts and the government are hers! Her Majesty's Government could not possibly make an argument against her and you can just see that the case of "The Crown vs The Crown" is not going to last very long in court. Given his outbursts can you be sure that the next in line to the throne will not take a more hands-on approach to running this country? The fact he wants to ban McDonalds is a good indication of his state of mind - surely if we want to stuff ourselves with Big Mac's then it's our democratic choice to do so?

The House of Lords: This is the thing that the House of Commons has voted to change. This is an interesting beast in that like all other upper chambers in democracies worldwide it has the power to vote down any laws that are created by the lower house. That said, they have been neutered in recent years by things like the "Parliament Act" which basically allows the House of Commons to over-ride the Lords in cases where the elected chamber has a mandate from the electorate. The funny thing here is that now that the Commons has voted to make the upper chamber elected, the vote has to be given to the Lords too... the words "Turkey" and "Christmas" come to mind. That said, the Commons should, in theory, be able to use the Parliament Act to over-rule the Lords. We'll see!

The Constitution: Ok, what constitution. The simple fact of the matter is that the UK doesn't have a wrtitten constitution. Why? There are probably lots of theories around, but personally I believe that there isn't anything in writing for the simple reason that it makes it easier for those in power to change it. Take countries like the USA or France for instance - both have passages in their c0nstitutions that lay down specific rules for changing the constitutions, and both are clear that nothing can be done to change that document without the will of the people and that those changes may not take away those rights! Us Brits do not have that sort of legal protection. Looking at it from that point of view it makes it a little clearer why so many in power in the UK are against an EU Constitution. They wouldn't want the British public to have any written rights after all!

Quite frankly, the political system in the UK is a sham. People complain about the EU with it's ever-merging menber states and power being excerted by an unelected quango in Brussels... but what about the 4 member states of the "United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland" (or just "Ireland" as it was until the 1920's). Scotland, Wales and Ireland were hardly given a choice in joining this union, one which is ruled from London... probably about as far as you can possibly get from the other members. This union has differing levels of "democracy" in each member state but ultimatly laws from London are imposed on the others. The union has a single currency. The ultimate ruler isn't democratically elected.

I'll leave you, the reader, to make up your own mind about this farce!