It is reported that Theresa May is set to appoint new Peers in a bid to avoid further Brexit defeats. The article quotes Labour peer and arch-Remainer Lord Adonis who has accused the Prime Minister of stuffing the Lords with loyal peers in an attempt to ram through her Brexit agenda.
Is this not what all Prime Ministers do: create more Peers in order to ‘ram through’ their ‘policy du jour’? What does another Prime Minister (of an opposing party) do but repeat the process for exactly the same reason?
Question: who is it that has to pay the additional cost of said Peers? The taxpayer. Just when was the taxpayer asked if they wished to fund what amounts to political largesse (liberality in bestowing gifts, especially in a lofty or condescending manner)?
Where taxation is concerned we are assured that within representative democracy this cannot occur without representation; so where, exactly , is our ‘representation’, ie, our ‘agreement’, where this political largesse is concerned? When a form of democracy, in this case representative democracy, can take what amounts to an arbitrary decision for purely political purposes without the agreement of those who must pay the bill, then there is not democracy per se, but democratised dictatorship.
How much longer must we, the taxpayer, be ‘taken to the cleaners’ at the behest of what amounts to legally elected robbers? Is it not time that we, the people, demanded a system whereby we can control the actions of those we elect? Is it not time that we adopted direct democracy?