What makes them a different group of people? That they are different people. The one house's members are the people whose agenda is to be members of the House of Commons, which is the governing body of the country. The other house's members do not have that responsibility, and have the ability to undertake duties that the first house's members don't have time for, as described earlier. That's the main point of having a second chamber under the current UK system, however its membership is determined.
As for their political-issue agenda, we don't in any case want these to be too different, or debilitating conflict will occur even if one house holds the political power and the other does not. But differences will naturally arise in the course of things, if only because the members are human beings and not party automatons. That's true even under the present situations of party discipline and three-line whips.
And they will especially arise if the two houses are elected at different times, and consequently the PR allocations are likely to differ.
What MTBC and Rhythmaning wrote is also applicable here.
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png)
andrewducker) wrote2022-11-20 12:00 pm
no subject
no subject
As for their political-issue agenda, we don't in any case want these to be too different, or debilitating conflict will occur even if one house holds the political power and the other does not. But differences will naturally arise in the course of things, if only because the members are human beings and not party automatons. That's true even under the present situations of party discipline and three-line whips.
And they will especially arise if the two houses are elected at different times, and consequently the PR allocations are likely to differ.
What MTBC and Rhythmaning wrote is also applicable here.