Abolish Lords

-Removed-

Your statement that 'the House of Lords has authority to reject Parliamentary Bills' was incorrect. I was making you aware of that.

And there are occasions when the House of Lords rightly bounces something back to the House of Commons for further scrutiny.

@Ghost-of-a-Duke said
And there are occasions when the House of Lords rightly bounces something back to the House of Commons for further scrutiny.

Then the requirements should be changed to where birthright has nothing to do with this office. Make the process democratic rather than hereditary.

In other words, make an equivalent office with elected officials.

-Removed-

The ability to dissolve Parliament is "real" power. The King can also stop a snap election (in certain cases) by refusing to dissolve Parliament.

Along with some other abilities (typically needed with the request of the PM), the Monarchy still has "real" power.

This should not be in the hands of a monarchy, only elected officials.

@vivify said
Then the requirements should be changed to where birthright has nothing to do with this office. Make the process democratic rather than hereditary.

In other words, make an equivalent office with elected officials.

No objection from me there.

@vivify said
Then the requirements should be changed to where birthright has nothing to do with this office. Make the process democratic rather than hereditary.

In other words, make an equivalent office with elected officials.

Agreed, a two-chambre Parliament makes sense, with slightly different portfolios, but both should be accountable (at the ballot box, if nowhere else).

@Ghost-of-a-Duke said
No objection from me there.

Presumably the Lords do not have the authority to block this bill.

@moonbus said
Presumably the Lords do not have the authority to block this bill.

That would be hilarious if they do. Like a president being able to pardon himself.

@vivify said
That would be hilarious if they do. Like a president being able to pardon himself.

Now who would do a thing like that ??

-Removed-

Yes, 'notional' is the word used (when you bother to look it up).

-Removed-

In the modern era, no King or Queen has dissolved parliament of their own volition, but this does not mean they lack the power to do so (irrespective of convention) or that this could not happen in the future.

King Charles III could dissolve parliament tomorrow, even if not requested to do so by the Prime Minister. (Unlikely as that is). That sure sounds like 'real' power to me.

@Suzianne said
It's almost like a mini-monarchy. Here in the US, we call that nepotism, and, prior to the Trump Crime Family, most Americans were against it.

But, it's England, the people we had to fight to get independence from, so I say to them, "you do you".

Yeah, those damn Trumps....not like the Roosevelts, Clintons, Bush's, Kennedy's etc were some kind of family heirarchy.