I HAVE to respond to Judith Duffy’s piece “Outrage as lords secure seats with just 23 votes” (Sep 24). I totally share Tommy Sheppard’s outrage.
In the heart of the United Kingdom there exists an institution that stands as a stark reminder of an outdated and undemocratic system: the House of Lords. For too long, this unelected chamber has symbolised the inequities that persist within our political framework, leaving a growing number of citizens, including me, increasingly frustrated and angered by its very existence.
The House of Lords, with its origins rooted in centuries past, remains a bastion of privilege and power, where members are appointed based on hereditary titles, political connections or ecclesiastical office. This anachronistic institution flies in the face of democratic principles and perpetuates a system in which a select few hold sway over the laws that govern millions.
READ MORE: Anger as BBC 'refuse to cover' anti-Brexit rally in London
As the world hurtles towards the future, the House of Lords remains firmly anchored in the past. While our society has evolved, becoming more inclusive and representative, this chamber stands as a monument to an era where only the privileged few had a say in governance. It is a relic, a holdover from a time that no longer resonates with the ideals of a modern, egalitarian society.
One of the most egregious aspects of the House of Lords is the fact that members are generously remunerated simply for showing up. It is a bitter pill to swallow for citizens who work tirelessly to make ends meet, to see unelected individuals receive substantial sums for their mere presence in the chamber. This system not only undermines the very concept of earning one’s keep, but also reinforces a culture of entitlement that is fundamentally at odds with the values of modern democracy.
At a time when ordinary citizens are asked to tighten their belts, when public services face cuts and austerity measures, the House of Lords continues to exist in a bubble of opulence. It is a glaring example of the disconnect between those who legislate and those who bear the consequences of those laws. This is not the democracy we deserve; it is a travesty of justice.
READ MORE: 'Horrific' vandalism of Scottish Yes hub investigated by police
For many Scots, the House of Lords serves as a vivid reminder of the limitations placed upon our nation within the United Kingdom. The decisions made within this chamber, by individuals who have never faced a democratic mandate, can have far-reaching consequences for Scotland and its people. The call for independence has never been more resonant, as the desire to free ourselves from this archaic establishment grows stronger with each passing day.
Scotland, a nation with a rich history and a vibrant culture, deserves the right to determine its own path. Shackled to an institution that does not represent our interests, we find ourselves at the mercy of decisions made by those who do not have our best interests at heart. It is a situation that reeks of injustice, an affront to the very principles of self-determination.
The time has come for a serious reevaluation of the House of Lords, and its place in our democratic system. While some argue for reform, it is worth considering whether such an institution can ever truly be made equitable. The very foundations upon which the House of Lords stands are so fundamentally flawed that perhaps it is time to entertain the idea of a clean break.
For Scotland, the path to independence represents a beacon of hope, a chance to unshackle ourselves from an institution that not only fails to represent our interests but actively undermines them. It is a call for self-determination, for a system where the people have a direct say in the laws that govern their lives.
The House of Lords is a symbol of inequality, privilege, and an outdated system that has no place in a modern democracy. For those who yearn for a fairer, more just society, the time to challenge this institution is now. Whether through reform or independence, the path forward may be fraught with challenges, but the destination is one that promises a more equitable and democratic future for all. It is time for change, and it is time for the voice of the people to be heard. The call for reform or independence is not just a desire for change; it is a demand for justice.
Kevin Walker
Yes Blairgowrie & Rattray
Why are you making commenting on The National only available to subscribers?
We know there are thousands of National readers who want to debate, argue and go back and forth in the comments section of our stories. We’ve got the most informed readers in Scotland, asking each other the big questions about the future of our country.
Unfortunately, though, these important debates are being spoiled by a vocal minority of trolls who aren’t really interested in the issues, try to derail the conversations, register under fake names, and post vile abuse.
So that’s why we’ve decided to make the ability to comment only available to our paying subscribers. That way, all the trolls who post abuse on our website will have to pay if they want to join the debate – and risk a permanent ban from the account that they subscribe with.
The conversation will go back to what it should be about – people who care passionately about the issues, but disagree constructively on what we should do about them. Let’s get that debate started!
Callum Baird, Editor of The National
Comments: Our rules
We want our comments to be a lively and valuable part of our community - a place where readers can debate and engage with the most important local issues. The ability to comment on our stories is a privilege, not a right, however, and that privilege may be withdrawn if it is abused or misused.
Please report any comments that break our rules.
Read the rules here