Eh, they've gutted most of the power of the House of Lords, but they still have the ability to slow down the passage of bills and amend them. I agree with the Coolidge philosophy that its better to kill bad bills than pass good ones, so I suppose its a good thing if it stops the government (regardless of which party is in power) from hastily passing too much knee-jerk legislation. Too bad the House of Lords can't kill bills outright anymore. In theory they could have stopped something like gay marriage regardless of the social pressure to pass it.
Still, the biggest problem is the Lords themselves, the whole body is basically a bunch of elitist aristocrats who want a cushy useless government job, so that's why so many Britons resent it.
I still like the unique, one-of-a-kind Tricamerial system I first proposed when I was 19 and a freshman in my college political science class: 1) House of Commons, 2) House of Representatives, 3) House of Senators. The lowest house, the Commons, is drafted into service "jury duty style" from a pool of ordinary Americans (like jury duty, they'd carefully vet them and eliminate any incompetent bozos, wackjobs, or obviously biased people with an axe to grind from serving). They'd serve a single 1-year term in government and would not be eligible to serve a second consecutive term. During that time their main job would be to serve as a check and balance over the other two houses and amend their legislation. (I'd probably also give them line item veto power, so they could remove individual parts of a bill, but not veto the entire bill) They could introduce bills of their own and send them to the other two houses for consideration, but they couldn't actually enact any legislation from any house (including their own). The other two houses could overrule any decision of the House of Commons by a 2/3rds vote. The power of impeachment would be solely in the House of Commons. Since they were drawn from the general population, unlike the other two houses, the members would have civilian jobs like teachers, bartenders, cab drivers, retail sales, etc., instead of all being lawyers and millionaire businessmen, and they'd be barred from taking money from lobbyists. That means they'd probably introduce legislation the other two houses would never start on their own accord. They'd elect a Commons Speaker from their own members, the same way a jury elects a jury foreman. I imagine a small body of about 50 legislators. Probably best to avoid cameras of their proceedings or it would turn into Reality TV show type spectacle.
If the Lords could still kill they’d certainly kill brexit.
” the biggest problem is the Lords themselves”
Yes. But their manner of appointment is the reason they are all pigs. Appointed by the “Monarch” on the “Advise” of the PM. Who does the PM appoint? Cronys who give money of course.
When the Lord’s blocked “The People’s budget” (exactly what it sounds like) in 1909 the then Liberal PM threatened to “advise” the King to appoint as many new peers as needed to pass it. The Lords backed down and shortly after the Commons passed the act cutting their balls off.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Parliament_Act_1911
You told me about your House of Commons idea, I like it, it’s very interesting. Something like that might work and could be a good thing. I’d like to try it out in a heavily Republican state where we could be sure there wouldn’t be a lot of lib idiots selected. I would probably call them the House of Tribunes after the Ancient Roman office.