Copyright © 2015 - 19 All rights reserved.

​​​27th April 2018

A Stain on British Democracy

The Lords continue to frustrate the attempts by the British people to leave the control of the political European Union which is seeking to hang onto our payments in perpetuity and keep us within its legal influence - to prevent us regaining our sovereignty and independence.

Although their actions are only advisory - they are also divisive - particularly over the EU and now influence those in the Commons to act to thwart the EU Referendum more openly.

The defeat of the government on Amendment 1 of the withdrawal Bill - to try to force the UK to remain in the Customs Union - thus making Britain impotent to obtain free trade arrangements anywhere else in the world - illustrates where the Lord's allegiances really lie - and it is not with the British people despite the oaths that they have sworn. See graphic below*

in the last article it was pointed out that sufficient unelected Peers had been ennobled by Blair and other Europhile political leaders that the government stood little chance of winning and, subsequently other defeats have followed - Amendment Human Rights Act, 11 ... and 18 ... etc.

Up until the first defeat in the Commons by Grieve and the usual suspects (13th December, 2017) there was a a totally false impression that our elected Representatives and Peers - who had agreed by large majorities to abide by the EU Referendum result - but then "the-cat-was-out-of-the-bag". They never had any intention of honouring their agreement and obligations - they were simply biding their time to go on the offensive in Parliament while they plotted and conspired behind the backs of the British people - with disdain and  contempt for the those they represent and treachery in their hearts. 

The rallying call went out by Blair - inciting parliament to "Rise up" against the British people (presumably - "to show them who is boss") - while the taxpayers and others
 who pay and support them and once they even foolishly honoured them now see them in their true light - Blair has clearly been coordinating their actions ever since.

But it was with Maastricht Treaty (1992) and John Major when the die-was-cast - that is when the EU made its move to push for total political union and our establishment set about changing our country for the worse to suit the EU's intentions and further feather their own nests - and Blair et al., set about rigging the Lords (and the Commons) as a backstop for any Referendum - which they must surely have been anticipated - and known about - by the government.

To explore this more we look further into the workings of the House of Lords - courtesy of lead author Meg Russell's (UCL), 10th February 2015 report by the Constitution Unit - entitled  "Enough is enough: Time to regulate prime ministerial appointments to the Lords" - see below for a pdf copy

Some of the key points from the report and a discussion relevant to current events:-

  • "​There is no limit to the size of the unelected chamber"
  • ​"A Prime Minister can appoint as many Peers has they like" "He thus not only controls the size of the House of Lords, but can manipulate its membership to strengthen the government side, and thus weaken the chamber’s ability to scrutinise."" - or vice versa.
  • "​... an historic problem with the system has been that prime ministers appoint more to their own side than to the opposition or the Crossbenches. But Cameron’s appointments have been particularly skewed."
  • ​Among new appointments since 2010, 62% have been to the government benches – compared to 43% under Blair, 47% under John Major and 48% under Margaret Thatcher. This unregulated party balance is a particular problem.
  • "The negative effect of these trends was somewhat masked by the large numbers departing the chamber in 1999.
  • "Numbers increased sharply under Blair 1997-2007, but the rate of increase under Cameron was even higher.

The report goes on to discuss, Lords reform and regulation of Prime Ministerial power - as things stand anyone appointed by Europhile Prime Ministers such as Blair - who have voted in favour of the EU should be cleared out. The Lords should only contain those with specialist knowledge, experience and background to assist the Commons in providing good legal governance - not "placemen".   


The above comments show quite clearly that we do not have a Democracy in any acceptable sense - the claims by Remainers', MP's and Peers that they only act in the interests of the people is clearly nonsense - they are at best acting with their conscience - and it is clear that many do so - more likely it is with their party allegiances and at worst they are just repaying favours granted by their ennobler's.

Such arrangements are particularly important regarding the UK and EU separation - since it is only possible to break free from the EU - by repealing the European Communities Act (1972) Sections 2(1) and 2(2) et seq., - if there is a majority in both the Commons and the Lords - but since the Lords can be so easily be manipulated the loss of a government majority in the Lords would prevent the UK ever leaving the EU. 

So since political parties are free to create majority votes in the Lords - it is legitimate to ask then why Theresa May did not anticipate such an eventuality of defeat in the Lords and act to prevent it by filling the Lords with new Peers? - as suggested by the report comment two above.


Selected Government Defeats in the Lords

The Amendment  tabled by Lord Pannick, Lord Goldsmith, MEP Baroness Ludford and Lord Deben seeking to keep most of the EU’s Charter of Fundamental Rights on the UK statute book after Brexit was passed by 316 votes to 245 – Majority of 71

  • Against the Amendment - Baroness Deech (Crossbench) stated: "What a failure the Charter has been in protecting human rights in Europe. On Poland’s interference with the judiciary, Hungary’s interference with higher education, the imprisonment of Catalonian independence leaders, the diminished freedom of the press in Slovakia and Bulgaria, the rise of extremist right-wing parties and ​the treatment of Roma and migrants, the Charter is impotent." 

What is more according to Article 6 TEU

  • "Article 6.1 The Union recognises the rights, freedoms and principles set out in the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union of 7 December 2000, as adapted at Strasbourg, on 12 December 2007, which shall have the same legal value as the Treaties."

  • "The provisions of the Charter shall not extend in any way the competences of the Union as defined in the Treaties."

  • "Article 6.2 The Union shall accede to the European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms."

  • "Such accession shall not affect the Union's competences as defined in the Treaties."

The bottom line is that the EU only cares about Rights and Freedoms as long as they don't conflict with the EU's power - have any of these Lords even read the Lisbon Treaty (2007)

Another Amendment tabled by Lord Pannick and Lib Dem Lord Beith seeking to remove ministers’ ability to specify when individuals may bring challenges against the validity of retained EU law after Brexit was passed by 285 votes to 235 – Majority of 50

  • Against the Amendment - Lord Howarth of Newport (Lab): "Have we, as parliamentarians, entirely lost confidence in the institution that we have the honour to serve and of which our country was once so proud? As we debate Brexit it sometimes appears that for many Remainers almost anything is preferable to resuming full responsibility for our own decisions in our own parliamentary democracy." 

One more Amendment tabled by Lord Pannick and Lord Beith, this one seeking to retain the right of action in domestic law post-Brexit if there is a failure to comply with the general principles of EU law, was passed by 280 votes to 223 – Majority of 57

  • Against the Amendment Lord Shinkwin (Con): "The people have spoken and they have chosen, by a clear majority, to leave the EU and to take back control of our laws. The UK is their country, not ours; the UK Parliament is theirs, not ours. We may have been their masters once; we are not now. We are their servants. They are the masters, and they have spoken in a once-in-a-generation referendum."

The First Government Defeat by the Lords

The result of the 1st Government defeat in the Lords - related to the Customs  Union is shown below in graphical form - the result was  348 to 225 majority of 123 against Britain leaving the EU Customs Union

The display clearly shows the distribution of the opposition to Britain leaving the Customs Union laid out against the government - an alliance of Peers on the Left of Politics (A Red Alliance - and so close to Marx's birthday) who have finally stopped pretending to "Accept the EU Referendum Vote" and have begun in earnest to frustrate the will of the British people on behalf of the EU - "torch bearers" for new attacks in the Commons as they throw away their "invisibility cloaks" and expose their true allegiance.

For more information including lists of the the Peers who voted for and against and links to video clips from the debates and various commentators please visit Brexit Central 


The Majority Vote in Favour of Amendment - 1 to the "Withdrawal Bill" in the House of Lords - Seeking to keep Britain in the EU Customs Union and thereby frustrating the EU Referendum Vote 23rd June 2016