One thing i have noticed come up alot, in the lords reform debate is the issue of bills being delayed sometime presented by certain people known for the hotness of their takes are an a priori negative outcome. I would like to present a counter example;

B673 - Child Sex Offences (Sentences) Bill

​

This is frankly a sordid reactionary bill that has no nuance or understanding of sentencing nor pedophilia.

https://preview.redd.it/wpl96h04d6r41.png?width=594&format=png&auto=webp&s=65d94f64483bbb7804e807906099904cd9eccc49

Yet the commons passed it by a landslide, with a quarter of MPs not in attendance.

Now I cannot speak for all parties but as a young dashing deputy whip in the Conservative party, my recollection was as follows;

Generally there are a number of MPs who will vote with the party line most of the time, and rarely read the bill, in cases of a free vote may read as far as the title or the party affiliation of the submitter.

In the specific case of B637, there was reluctance from those setting the whips to oppose it for political reasons. Hence a free vote. I suspect most parties came to similar conclusions. the result was a landslide - people have rightly a natural gut reaction that child sex crime is bad.

Then the lords rejected it *and also wreaked it which was reversed by speakership bc of amendment rules.

B673.2 - Child Sex Offences (Sentences) Bill

(Identical in contents of the bill, but also linked if anyone wants to go view the debate)

The result this time?

​

https://preview.redd.it/afgyjowcf6r41.png?width=515&format=png&auto=webp&s=890983f3c007bc7504d9e3fbe8eeff6dc1896839

Almost a complete reversal, so what happened? The lords rejection of the bill sent a signal for people to look closer at what the bill was doing, and gave opponents of the bill across parties had an opportunity to express concerns and explain them.

None of this is possible on the curt timetables mhoc with only a uni caramel chamber.

Only by having a lords composed of we hope people who are both new to the sim and energetic and also a good number of fuddy duddies who do not have the same political considerations as those perhaps setting the whips. Can you get the scrutiny that you need.

Free thoughts on the proceedings of the Continental Congress lords meta reform debate

More broadly you need similar scrutiny and oversight from the lords to hold governments to account. Whether by report, rejection or amendment. The ability of the lords to do that both irl and in sim comes from their removal by degree from the party system.

Without such a check, the commons even with committees would be bill factory for any majority government.

This doesn't mean either that a government cannot be successful and pass controversial legislation, just look a blupurple 1. People in that government, particularity semier and rand on the lords end and other fried and myself on the commons amendment committee side put in a lot of effort to ensure that the governments business found its way to Royal Assent.

If you don't want your bill to go to .4 reading it doesn't have to there are not only meta remedies but also canon ones as demonstrated by Blupurple. Speakership are already empowered to step in, they just don't in some cases.