Key Issues for the New Parliament 2010
House of Commons Library Research
The House of Lords
Lucinda Maer
Lucinda
Lucinda Maer
Maer
Maer
THE NEW PARLIAMENT
Reform
of the
the House
Houseof
ofLords,
Lords,long
longaaahung
hungchamber,
chamber,remains
remainson
theagenda
agenda
Reform of
of
the
House
of
Lords,
long
hung
chamber,
remains
ononthe
the
agenda
House
of
1997House of
of
Lords
reform
isisaaapiece
piece
of
“unfinished
business”
from
the
Labour
governments
ofof
1997of Lords
Lords reform
reformis
pieceof
of“unfinished
“unfinishedbusiness”
business”from
fromthe
theLabour
Labourgovernments
governments
19972010.
The
majority
of
the
hereditary
peers
were
removed
by
the
House
of
Lords
Act
1999
and
the
2010. The
Act
1999
and
thethe
The majority
majorityof
ofthe
thehereditary
hereditarypeers
peerswere
wereremoved
removedbybythe
theHouse
HouseofofLords
Lords
Act
1999
and
Constitutional
Reform Act
2005 removed
the law
Lords. Further
reform was
much talked
about
but
Constitutional
talked
about
butbut
Constitutional Reform
ReformAct
Act2005
2005removed
removedthe
thelaw
lawLords.
Lords.Further
Furtherreform
reformwas
wasmuch
much
talked
about
never
occurred.
never occurred.
occurred.
Membership
and role
of the
second chamber
Membership
Membership and
and role
roleof
ofthe
thesecond
secondchamber
chamber
The majority of members of the House of Lords are life peers. Nominations for life peerages are
majority
of
of
ofofLords
lifelife
peerages
areare
The
majority
of members
membersremains
ofthe
theHouse
House
Lordsare
arelife
lifepeers.
peers.Nominations
Nominationsforfor
peerages
Reform of the House of Lords, long aThe
hung
chamber,
on
passed
from
the
Prime
Minister
to
the
Queen,
and
originate
either
through
political
parties
or,
since
passed
from
the
Prime
Minister
to
the
Queen,
and
originate
either
through
political
parties
or,
since
passed from the Prime Minister to the Queen, and originate either through political parties or,
since
the agenda
2001, through the non-statutory Appointments Commission.
House of Lords reform is a piece of “unfinished
business” from the Labour governments of
1997-2010. The majority of the hereditary
peers were removed by the House of Lords Act
1999 and the Constitutional Reform Act 2005
removed the law Lords. Further reform was
much talked about but never occurred.
2001,
2001, through
through the
the non-statutory
non-statutoryAppointments
AppointmentsCommission.
Commission.
Life
Peers
dominate
Life
Peers
dominate
dominate
House of Life
LordsPeers
membership
by peerage type,
House of Lords membership by peerage type,
House of Lords membership
April 2010 by peerage type,
April 2010
April 2010
Bishops,
Bishops,
26
Bishops,
Heredit,
26
Heredit,
26
91
Heredit,
91
91
MEMBERSHIP AND ROLE OF THE
SECOND CHAMBER
The majority of members of the House of Lords
are life peers. Nominations for life peerages are
passed from the Prime Minister to the Queen,
and originate either through political parties
or, since 2001, through the non-statutory
Appointments Commission.
No one party has overall control in the House of
Lords. Since 1999 peers have been appointed
roughly in proportion to the share of votes cast
in the most recent general election. Coalitions
must be built across party groups and ‘cross
benchers’ in order to avoid or inflict defeats.
The Standing Orders in the Lords provide few
opportunities for debate to be curtailed and
there is no selection of amendments. As well as
large numbers of former MPs, the membership
of the House of Lords includes notable experts
and cross-benchers often from outside party
politics. The House of Lords is often praised for
its consensual style, its considered approach to
scrutiny and the combined knowledge of its
membership.
The removal of the majority of the hereditary
peers, together with the size of the
Government majority and concerns about the
scrutiny function in the Commons, has arguably
given the House of Lords a greater sense of
18
Life peers,
Life peers,
590
Life
peers,
590
590
A
A hung
hung chamber
chamber
House ofALords
membership
by party,
hung
chamber
House of Lords
membership
by party,
April 2010
House of Lords
membership
by party,
April
2010
April 2010
Con, 186
Con, 186
Con, 186
Lab, 211
Lab, 211
Lab, 211
LD, 72
LD, 72
LD, 72
Other, 26
Other, 26
Bishops,
Other,
26
Bishops,
26
26
Bishops,
26
CrossCrossbench,
bench,
Cross186
186
bench,
legitimacy and purpose.186This has resulted
in a more assertive chamber which is willing
and able to cause government defeats. For
example, during the passage of the Prevention
of Terrorism Bill 2004-05 the Lords inflicted
eighteen defeats over the detention of terrorist
suspects. Although the government can bypass the House of Lords by using the Parliament
Acts, the conditions and political will required to
do so means its use is rare. The two Chambers
therefore often have to compromise to during
the legislative process.
SIZE AND STANDARDS
The House of Lords is one of the largest
parliamentary chambers in the world, second
only to the Chinese National Party Congress.
It is likely to grow further, with an increased
number of Conservative peers required to
rebalance numbers and a dissolution list
expected from Gordon Brown. This is despite
the fact the major parties all advocate a smaller
second chamber in the longer term.
Despite some unfavourable publicity regarding
the appointments process, lobbying and alleged
financial impropriety, the House of Lords
remains largely self-regulated. It preferred
not to transfer its expenses system to the new
Independent Parliamentary Standards Authority.
Reform measures included in the Constitutional
Reform and Governance Bill 2009-10 would
have allowed peers to resign, enabled the
expulsion of peers in cases of wrong-doing,
and ended the by-elections for hereditary peers.
However, these provisions were all removed
during ‘wash-up’.
TOWARDS REFORM?
More fundamentally, it is widely held that
the composition of the second chamber is
undemocratic. Along with the Canadian
Senate, it is one of just two unelected second
chambers that exist in major democratic states.
In 2007, free votes in the House of Commons
came out in favour of both an 80% elected
and 100% elected chamber. The major political
parties have all pledged to introduce either a
majority or totally elected second chamber.
However, the previous administration found
that despite a Royal Commission report, five
government white papers, a select committee
report, and indicative votes on composition
being held twice during the period in both
chambers, no clear way forward towards a
“more democratic and representative” second
chamber emerged. The difficult questions
remain. For example, how would the primacy
of the House of Commons be retained? Which
electoral system would be appropriate? If
an appointed element is to be retained,
what process should be used? Should there
be a continuing role for Church of England
representatives? Would opposition in the House
of Lords impede the passage of legislation?
LIMITS ON THE POWERS OF THE
HOUSE OF LORDS
The Parliament Acts of 1911 and 1949 mean
that any bill (except one to postpone a general
election) that passes the Commons in two
successive sessions can be presented for Royal
Assent without the consent of the Lords, as long
as certain time restrictions apply.
The Salisbury Convention requires the House
of Lords not to reject at second reading any
government legislation that has been passed by
the Commons and that carries out a manifesto
commitment.
The Lords may not amend bills relating to
taxation or government expenditure and
under the Parliament Acts the amount of time
given to scrutiny of the Finance Bill in the Lords
is limited.
19