reduce or abolish mlc's

The need for the upper house is now defunct, and there number should be greatly reduced or indeed done away with alltogether.

Why the contribution is important

They are totally uneccessary.

by mannin on April 04, 2017 at 06:13PM

Current Rating

Average rating: 3.5
Based on: 8 votes


  • Posted by Dil April 05, 2017 at 05:11

    I am not sure their need is defunct, in fact there should be an upper house to verify what the Government propose. What is needed is a review of how they are appointed and their role.
  • Posted by mannin April 05, 2017 at 10:57

    Judging by the hours they have sat for over the last few weeks, they do next to nothing anyway so I believe they are now a defunct drain on our finances, time for common sense to be applied instead of continuing the status-quo.
  • Posted by nemo April 05, 2017 at 11:04

    Given that MLC's are given ministerial appointments and form part of the council of ministers they cannot be seen to be acting independently of government as an effective scrutineer of legislation and in effect we already have a unicameral system. I therefore see no issue with getting rid.
  • Posted by hamertime April 05, 2017 at 14:29

    They are there and unelected by design, they protect against demagoguery which is what caused the ancient democracies to collapse. People who want to get rid of them generally don't seem to realise that they are there for a good reason, and it is not to circumvent democracy but to ensure its survival.
  • Posted by ManxVoter April 05, 2017 at 14:34

    Yes, keep 24 MHKs but do away with LegCo
  • Posted by ManxVoter April 08, 2017 at 18:01

    Lawrie Hooper MHK has stated that - with LibVan proposals for LegCo - MLCs will have a larger or enhanced role. I'd wish to see this view elaborated upon
Log in or register to add comments and rate ideas

Idea topics