* Home * About * Team * Our Supporters * What they say * Donate * Submit an article * Contact * Jobs Login | Signup ____________________ Search × close Site Logo * openDemocracy + About + Can Europe Make It? + Arab Awakening + openGlobalRights + oD Blog + civilResistance * OurKingdom + About + Donate + Debates + OurNHS + G4S: Securing Whose World? + OurBeeb * oD Russia + Queer Russia + Rights + Media + Regions + Ukraine + Green Russia + Khodorkovsky + The Russian Cynic * oD 50.50 + 50.50 Dialogues + Gender Politics Religion + Our Africa + People on the Move + Women and the 'Arab Spring' + Peacework * openSecurity + Cities in Conflict + Beyond Enemy Images + Syria's Peace + Future Under Surveillance + Whose Police? * Transformation + About + Transforming: Economics + Politics + Activism + Society + Ourselves * More + openEconomy + openIndia + Window on the Middle East + Digital Commons + Participation Now + Political Aesthetics * View * What links here Say 'no' to a Senate, the Americanisation of the UK has gone far enough, an OK competition Anthony Barnett 2 December 2010 Subjects: * Ideas * Democracy and government * UK Printer-friendly version Send to friend PDF version Facebook Twitter An all-party proposal to replace the House of Lords is about to appear. The word is that they will call for an elected chamber to be called...' The Senate'. How unoriginal can you be? An all-party proposal to replace the House of Lords is about to appear. It is being led by Nick Clegg and the guiding spirit is Jack Straw. The word is that they will call for an (eventually) elected chamber to be called ' The Senate'. How unoriginal can you be? In a pre-emptive strike against the report, Timothy Garton Ash in today's Guardian has a fine time puncturing the utterly corrupt and contemptible crony chamber we have today. He then goes on to reject the idea of its capture by the political parties as a step backwards. He is right, of course. He then comes up with his own solution. Ah, Tim, there have been so many! (Including my own modest one.) But he misses the critical point, the one which the machine that runs Westminster is well aware of. All reforms and replacements and in between schemes for the second chamber will be powerless before the executive leviathan unless and until they are set out as one entire half of parliament which has to be redefined as a whole. Leave it as it and you can fiddle (or burn) the upper half and... you are leaving the whole as it is. Peter Carty and I tried to make this obvious point in our book The Athenian Option. No, we actually did make it, more than once. Established thinking, however, prevents it from being registered. And Tim goes along with this received failure of wisdom. For example, you have to empower the Commons to be the legislative chamber, so that the second one can scrutinise it. But today, we have two legislative chambers. Retain this structure and it follows that the upper house has to be controlled by party whips. If it is taken in isolation from the Commons, there can be no democratic reform of the House of Lords Calling it a 'Senate' is a classic, spin doctors way of evading this. New Labour always wanted Britain to become like America without having to have a constitutional revolution. What could be 'more radical' than 'replacing' the Lords with a Senate? But what a betrayal of the English tradition - that we have to reach across the Atlantic to bring back a term consciously modeled on Rome so that no one mistook the new republic as looking to Greece and democracy? Surely, whatever it is, we can call it something that is rooted in our own traditions? OurKingdom will award a copy of Steve Pincus's 1688 The First Modern Revolution to the reader who suggests the best new name for a second chamber however it is organised. PS: My approach to a new upper house would include this proposal by The Earl of Clancarty from an 11 October debate (starts 3.14 pm) in the Lords: a modern reformed House of Lords should recognise that, rather than being a lesser other place, it could be celebration of public involvement in government. Rather than narrowing down politics to tighter control by professional politicians, should we not be opening up our second House to the British people? If we retain an appointments system to introduce expertise and life experience into the Lords, should it not be decoupled from party-political involvement, perhaps by bringing ordinary citizens into government of their peers through a jury system View the discussion thread. About the author Anthony Barnett (@AnthonyBarnett) is the founder of openDemocracy Creative Commons License This article is published under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 3.0 licence. If you have any queries about republishing please contact us. Please check individual images for licensing details. OurKingdom * About * Debates * Team * Get Involved Follow us: Email sign-up form OurKingdom Facebook page OurKingdom on Twitter OurKingdom RSS feed Support OurKingdom [£2 - monthly.] Subscribe Donate Accepted credit/debit cards: Mastercard, Visa, American Express Highlights Vote Yes for the multitude A non-nationalist argument for Scottish independence Will governments ever obey their own law? Home Truths: the decline of the Welsh language Rethinking the 1970s We have to change the way we tell the story of our past Dear England, please listen to what the Scots are actually talking about Privatisation, a very British disease The triumph of populism Hiding behind the cenotaph Cameron will seek to re-write history Bludgeoned to death - by a G4S guard Not just 4 lulz Previous Pause Next Exploring the Financial Curse Tax Justice Network * The Finance Curse - introduction Nicholas Shaxson and John Christensen * More than a lobby: finance in the UK Tamasin Cave * The metropolitanisation of gains, the nationalisation of losses Adam Leaver * The ills of financial dominance Doreen Massey * The resource curse, or the paradox of poverty from plenty Nicholas Shaxson More Reclaiming the NHS reclaiming * Asleep on the job - England's young doctors and the NHS reforms Guddi Singh * Too posh to care Sue Paraszczuk * Rushing off a cliff - privatisation of patient transport services Julius Marstrand More OurKingdom comments Powered by Disqus OurKingdom is reading * My grovelling apology to Herr Schäuble – Telegraph Blogs * Margaret Thatcher Reviewed by John Gray | New Republic * Peace envoy Tony Blair on yacht in Mediterranean as West debates air strikes on Syria | Mail Online * The RAF's secret spies: Declassified CIA documents reveal British pilots flew U2 missions over Soviet Union during the Cold War | Mail Online * Why the Jimmy Mubenga case won't be a watershed moment for government outsourcing more openDemocracy * Home * About * Team * Our Supporters * What they say * Donate * Submit an article * Contact * Jobs * Privacy * Licensing & Syndication * Advertise * Media Inquiries * Vacancies * RSS Feed Sections openDemocracy Free thinking for the world OurKingdom Investigating the crisis of democracy in Britain oDRussia Russia and beyond 5050 Critical perspectives: social justice, gender, pluralism openSecurity Conflict and peacebuilding Transformation Where love meets social justice Most popular If security at universities isn't for students, who is it for? Adam Ramsay _________________________________________________________________ This week's window on the Middle East - November 13, 2013 Arab Awakening _________________________________________________________________ Qatar in change Michael Stephens _________________________________________________________________ Egypt in the balance: what the blogs are saying 8 - 14 November Rana Nessim _________________________________________________________________ Can you change the world from your living room? Jacob Z. Hess Joan Blades _________________________________________________________________ Recent comments AddThis openDemocracy Ltd, The Print House, 18 Ashwin Street, London, E8 3DL. Tel: +44 (0) 207 193 0676