<?xml version="1.0"?>
<rss xmlns:media="http://search.yahoo.com/mrss/" version="2.0">
							<channel><title>New Posts For Thread: House of Commons debate weds--abolish house of lords</title><link>https://community.betfair.com/chit_chat/go/thread/view/94038/30416201/house-of-commons-debate-weds--abolish-house-of-lords</link><description>Put forward by SNPwill be interesting to see 2 faced labour vote against</description><item><title>the Lords will be too busy filling their bellies</title><link>https://community.betfair.com/chit_chat/go/thread/view/94038/30416201/house-of-commons-debate-weds--abolish-house-of-lords?post_id=543046905#543046905</link><description>the Lords will be too busy filling their bellies</description><pubDate>Sun, 11 Jan 2015 13:25:40 -0600</pubDate></item><item><title>If this is agreed upon in the House of Commons, does this have to be approved by the House of Lords?Seems pointless imo.</title><link>https://community.betfair.com/chit_chat/go/thread/view/94038/30416201/house-of-commons-debate-weds--abolish-house-of-lords?post_id=543046829#543046829</link><description>If this is agreed upon in the House of Commons, does this have to be approved by the House of Lords?Seems pointless imo.</description><pubDate>Sun, 11 Jan 2015 13:23:47 -0600</pubDate></item><item><title>The tories were the largest party at Westminster after the 2010 election on 36% of the vote and much lower in Scotland, yet we have to put up with them. Nothing new there.The SNP now have nearly 100,000 members which makes them the third largest part</title><link>https://community.betfair.com/chit_chat/go/thread/view/94038/30416201/house-of-commons-debate-weds--abolish-house-of-lords?post_id=543046521#543046521</link><description>The tories were the largest party at Westminster after the 2010 election on 36% of the vote and much lower in Scotland, yet we have to put up with them. Nothing new there.The SNP now have nearly 100,000 members which makes them the third largest part</description><pubDate>Sun, 11 Jan 2015 13:14:03 -0600</pubDate></item><item><title>1. They got less that 50% of the vote on a turnout of 50%, less than 1 in 4 of the Scottish electorate voted for them.2. The patterns of votes for them is absolutely unrelated to what I said about the actions of the SNP.Their "white paper" for an ind</title><link>https://community.betfair.com/chit_chat/go/thread/view/94038/30416201/house-of-commons-debate-weds--abolish-house-of-lords?post_id=543045063#543045063</link><description>1. They got less that 50% of the vote on a turnout of 50%, less than 1 in 4 of the Scottish electorate voted for them.2. The patterns of votes for them is absolutely unrelated to what I said about the actions of the SNP.Their "white paper" for an ind</description><pubDate>Sun, 11 Jan 2015 12:21:36 -0600</pubDate></item><item><title>PS as for governing like a dictatorship, the SNP was elected to a majority in Holyrood via a far more democratic voting system than the out dated FPP still in use for Westminster. Your trouble Just Checking, is that you are incandescent, seething, BE</title><link>https://community.betfair.com/chit_chat/go/thread/view/94038/30416201/house-of-commons-debate-weds--abolish-house-of-lords?post_id=543044659#543044659</link><description>PS as for governing like a dictatorship, the SNP was elected to a majority in Holyrood via a far more democratic voting system than the out dated FPP still in use for Westminster. Your trouble Just Checking, is that you are incandescent, seething, BE</description><pubDate>Sun, 11 Jan 2015 12:04:30 -0600</pubDate></item><item><title>Just Checking03 Jan 15 00:55Joined:25 Jun 06| Topic/replies: 15,553 | Blogger: Just Checking's blogHopkins actually kind of has a point in a muddled way. Basically lets say this happened and Scotland was independent at that point. Would it have spent</title><link>https://community.betfair.com/chit_chat/go/thread/view/94038/30416201/house-of-commons-debate-weds--abolish-house-of-lords?post_id=543044593#543044593</link><description>Just Checking03 Jan 15 00:55Joined:25 Jun 06| Topic/replies: 15,553 | Blogger: Just Checking's blogHopkins actually kind of has a point in a muddled way. Basically lets say this happened and Scotland was independent at that point. Would it have spent</description><pubDate>Sun, 11 Jan 2015 12:00:10 -0600</pubDate></item><item><title>The SNP, that governs like a dictatorship as there is no revising second house, nobody in the sheep in their party that steps out of line, they filled all the supposed revising committees in Scotland with their own and the nod everything through, and</title><link>https://community.betfair.com/chit_chat/go/thread/view/94038/30416201/house-of-commons-debate-weds--abolish-house-of-lords?post_id=543043517#543043517</link><description>The SNP, that governs like a dictatorship as there is no revising second house, nobody in the sheep in their party that steps out of line, they filled all the supposed revising committees in Scotland with their own and the nod everything through, and</description><pubDate>Sun, 11 Jan 2015 11:08:41 -0600</pubDate></item><item><title>Too many Liebour slobs in there. Red Tories.Among its number, the house of Lords has a load of clerics. Unelected clerics ruling a country eh? Iran anyone?</title><link>https://community.betfair.com/chit_chat/go/thread/view/94038/30416201/house-of-commons-debate-weds--abolish-house-of-lords?post_id=543043243#543043243</link><description>Too many Liebour slobs in there. Red Tories.Among its number, the house of Lords has a load of clerics. Unelected clerics ruling a country eh? Iran anyone?</description><pubDate>Sun, 11 Jan 2015 10:51:22 -0600</pubDate></item><item><title>Put forward by SNPwill be interesting to see 2 faced labour vote against</title><link>https://community.betfair.com/chit_chat/go/thread/view/94038/30416201/house-of-commons-debate-weds--abolish-house-of-lords?post_id=543038641#543038641</link><description>Put forward by SNPwill be interesting to see 2 faced labour vote against</description><pubDate>Sun, 11 Jan 2015 05:50:27 -0600</pubDate></item></channel></rss>
