Reforming the House of Lords

Learning Objectives

• To understand the reforms implemented under Tony Blair

• To understand the reforms implemented under Gordon Brown

• To understand the reforms proposed under the Coalition

The House of Lords

• Probably the most debated aspect of parliamentary reform is that of the House of Lords, which remains a totally non-elected second chamber.

• What changes have been introduced so far and what are the main arguments surrounding the second chamber becoming elected or partially elected?

Reforms so far…• The Labour Party has long called

for reform of the House of Lords. Labour MPs particularly have resented their legitimate authority being challenged by non-elected peers who are accountable to no one.

• The Blair government moved to cut the number of hereditary peers down to 92 as part of a reform bill introduced in 1999, but many Labour backbenchers expected much swifter and more decisive measures and were disappointed by the governments response.

Read the handout “Future plans for the House of Lords”.• Stalling of Reforms• Criticisms of the Lords

Reforms• Should the Lords be

elected?• Abolishing the second

chamber• The Coalition & the HofL

Thinking Hats Political Analysis

Thinking Hat Group 1 Group 2 Group 3

White HatAdil Manraj Simranjit

Red Hat

Yellow HatKiran Prabjyot Sandeep

Black Hat

Green HatMelody Emily Lauren

Blue Hat

• Get into your groups, on one table, or put two tables together.• Look at what thinking hat you are and look at the page in your planner to see what you

are expected to do.Groups are non-negotiable.

Blue Hats are Group Leaders – what they say goes!!!

White Hat – FactsWhat factual information do the sources tell you?

Red Hat – HunchesWhat is the source telling you? (Inference/Portrayal)

Yellow Hat - PositivesWhat positive information are the sources giving?

Black Hat - NegativesWhat negative information are the sources giving?

Green Hat – CreativityCan you come up with any other ideas?

Blue Hat - OverviewCombine all of the information into a verbal answer.

What can you learn from the sources about House of Lords Reform?

RACE AGAINST THE CLOCK – You only have 6 minutes!

BONUS CHALLENGE:If you can identify the 5 options for

reforming the House of Lords you will receive a merit.

HINTSThink of the

combinations of elected, appointed etc.

Source A

Source B

Source C

Source D

Source E

Source F

Options for Reform• Why is reform still necessary?• Reforms stalled after stage 1 – House of Lords is

still undemocratic and lacks authorityNo ChangeRemove the House of LordsAn All Elected ChamberAn All Appointed ChamberPartly Appointed-Partly Elected Chamber

Thinking Hats Political Analysis

Yellow Hat - PositivesWhat are the arguments

for this option for reform?

Black Hat - NegativesWhat are the arguments

for this option for reform?

YOUR TASK:• One of you is the Yellow Hat and will list the arguments

FOR this option for reform.• One of you is the Black Hat and will list the arguments

AGAINST this option for reform.

No Change

Those who advocate no change argue that the House of Lords has proved to be effective as it is (see list of recent action) - it would be unwise to make reforms which may have unknown consequences.Those who argue against this point to the fact that the HoL is unrepresentative and it is no longer tolerable to have such an undemocratic institution legislating in this modern age.

For Against

The current HoL compliments the HoC as it has a different composition

It remains undemocratic and lacks legitimacy and accountability

The expertise and experience in the HoL is essential for scrutiny

There is less party influence - this is crucial for scrutiny

The problem if it were elected at general election time under same voting system =

likely to have same composition = no conflict and would become a rubber stamping

institution HOWEVER if elected at a different time with a different system = likely to be

stalemate because both houses have democratic legitimacy

Remove the House of Lords

• It would be possible to remove the HoL altogether and to have a Unicameral system as they do in Denmark and in New Zealand.• The House of Commons has already

demonstrated that they are not in favour of a unicameral system (2007 votes = majority of 253 in favour of retaining a second chamber.

For Against

A second chamber is not needed in a unitary system and anyway it can

only delay

UK has too big a population for a unicameral system - New Zealand

has less than 10 million

A reformed House of Commons could be given more time for

scrutiny

Scrutiny needs to be carried out by a second chamber with less party

control/influence and it needs more time

It works efficiently in countries like Denmark and Sweden, New

Zealand and IsraelThere is little support for theis

option

An All Elected Chamber

• Those that argue for a fully elected chamber point to the fact that this would be democratic and therefore more accountable. It would act as a more effective check on the Executive• Those who argue against it state that the new

HoL might simply mirror the HoC and therefore it would serve no purpose - if a Govt. had a majority in both houses it would have far too much power.

For Against

Democratic legitimacy - it would be more democratic -It is the only way to guarantee that the

HoL would be accountable to the people – this is the only basis for legitimate rule.

Specialist Knowledge - Advantage of appointed 2nd Chamber = people can be chosen because they are

specialists/have experience

Wider representation - 2 elected chambers would widen the basis of representation (different voting

systems/terms/election dates/constituencies) = strengthen democratic process

Gridlocked Govt - Two co-equal chambers = paralysis. There would be rivalry between them and between

the Executive and Parliament.

Better Legislation - non elected basis of current HoL restricts its role as a revising chamber. If elected –

popular authority would enable it to exercise greater powers of scrutiny

Complementary Chambers - 2 chambers = advantage because can carry out different roles - only one of

these chambers needs to be popularly elected for this to work

Checking the Commons - Only an elected body can properly check another elected body

Dangers of Partisanship - Any elected chamber will be dominated by the Party ‘hacks’ - an appointed 2nd

chamber would have reduced partisanship

Ending Executive Tyranny - Exec dominates HoC. If HoL = elected (especially on basis of PR) it would be

more powerful/have greater authority = better check

Less Decisive Govt. - an elected HoL with more authority might impede decisive Govt.

For Against

Elimination of any corrupt practices/cronyism in appointment of Lords

Descriptive Representation - Elected Peers might have popular authority - but it would be hard to ensure

that they reflected society as a whole - this could be done through appointed Peers

Move with the times - a fully elected chamber could be changed at election time

Voter Apathy - Too many elections might lead to voter fatigue/apathy

elected on a regional basis = If this were the case it would enable the regions to have more

representation

Composition - if elected at same time as HoC and using same voting method = likely to be the same

composition = will become a rubber stamp HOWEVER if voted by different method at different time = different composition = likely to be stalemate

Another way of seeking redress for citizens - if their ‘Lord’ was democratically elected

Primacy? - If both chambers are democratically elected - which takes primacy?

More Responsive to public mood - therefore may increase public support for the govt. and faith in our

system after recent scandals

An All Appointed Chamber

• Those who favour this option argue that it would help to bring high quality members into the legislative process and avoid giving too much power to the second chamber (as this would obstruct effective government)• Those who argue against this option state that

it would merely preserve the undemocratic nature of the HoL and would also extend the patronage of party leaders

For Against

Opportunity to bring people into political process who would not

otherwise want to stand for election

Could put too much power into the hands of those who appoint the Lords - could lead to corruption

Membership could be controlled to ensure that all major

groups/associations in society are represented

It is undemocratic and holds back progress towards a modern system

It can bring more independents into the political process

it might lack legitimacy and public support because the people have

no part in its composition

Partly Appointed-Partly Elected Chamber

• Those who argue for this option claim that it would combine the advantages of the two systems • Those who argue against it state that it

would only be a compromise - the system would be only partially democratic and it would reserve the power of patronage

For Against

Legitimacy and democratic representation would be provided

without losing expertise

Still undemocratic and therefore lacking in legitimacy and

accountability

It would ensure a good gender/ethnic mix of Lords

It would retain the primacy of the HoC

EXAM FOCUS

Question 2: Parliamenta) With reference to the source, what changes to

the second chamber are proposed? (5)b) With reference to the source, and your own

knowledge, explain the arguments for a fully or partly elected second chamber. (10)

c) Make out a case against an elected second chamber. (25)

(Total for Question 2 = 40 marks)

Thinking Hats Political Analysis

Thinking Hat Group 1 Group 2

White Hat

Red Hat

Yellow Hat

Black Hat

Green Hat

Blue Hat

• Get into your groups, on one table, or put two tables together.• Look at what thinking hat you are and look at the page in your planner to see what you

are expected to do.Groups are non-negotiable.

Blue Hats are Group Leaders – what they say goes!!!

White Hat – FactsWhat factual information does the source tell you?

Red Hat – HunchesWhat is the source telling you? (Inference/Portrayal)

Yellow Hat - PositivesWhat positive information is the source giving?

Black Hat - NegativesWhat negative information is the source giving?

Green Hat – CreativityCan you come up with any other ideas?

Blue Hat - OverviewCombine all of the information into verbal answers.

What can you learn from the sources about House of Lords Reform?

RACE AGAINST THE CLOCK – You only have 10 minutes!

BONUS CHALLENGE:Marks awarded for

AO3 – communication and coherence in your

answer.

HINTSThink about how to explain your answer

clearly – no er…erm…um…like…etc.

White Paper on reform of the House of LordsThis White Paper sets out the government’s proposals for a reformed second chamber of the UK Parliament. The proposals are based on the House of Commons votes for an 80% or 100% elected second chamber and follow cross-party talks on how this could be achieved. The White Paper makes proposals for reform in a number of areas:Role and compositionThe House of Lords plays a valuable role in holding the government to account and revising legislation. The reforms would strengthen those roles and make the second chamber more accountable. The House of Commons would continue to be theprimary chamber in the UK legislature.Membership of the chamberThe proposed reforms would create a second chamber with directly elected members, which would be smaller than the House of Commons. The remaining rights of hereditary peers to sit and vote in the second chamber would be removed.Powers of the new chamberThe government proposes no changes to the powers of a reformed second chamber.The possible role of appointed members to ensure independenceIf it is decided that there should be a 20% appointed element, the government proposes that its key purpose would be to provide a significant independent element in the second chamber. A statutory appointments commission would seek nominations and applications for membership. The government is also proposing changes to the arrangements for eligibility, remuneration and accountability. Source: White Paper, An Elected Second Chamber, July 14, 2008.

EXAM FOCUS

Question 2: Parliamenta) With reference to the source, what changes to

the second chamber are proposed? (5)b) With reference to the source, and your own

knowledge, explain the arguments for a fully or partly elected second chamber. (10)

c) Make out a case against an elected second chamber. (25)

(Total for Question 2 = 40 marks)

Homework

Q2 ParliamentWhite Paper on reform of the House of LordsThis White Paper sets out the government’s proposals for a reformed second chamber of the UK Parliament. The proposals are based on the House of Commons votes for an 80% or 100% elected second chamber and follow cross-party talks on how this could be achieved. The White Paper makes proposals for reform in a number of areas:Role and compositionThe House of Lords plays a valuable role in holding the government to account and revising legislation. The reforms would strengthen those roles and make the second chamber more accountable. The House of Commons would continue to be theprimary chamber in the UK legislature.Membership of the chamberThe proposed reforms would create a second chamber with directly elected members, which would be smaller than the House of Commons. The remaining rights of hereditary peers to sit and vote in the second chamber would be removed.Powers of the new chamberThe government proposes no changes to the powers of a reformed second chamber.The possible role of appointed members to ensure independenceIf it is decided that there should be a 20% appointed element, the government proposes that its key purpose would be to provide a significant independent element in the second chamber. A statutory appointments commission would seek nominations and applications for membership. The government is also proposing changes to the arrangements for eligibility, remuneration and accountability.Source: White Paper, An Elected Second Chamber, July 14, 2008.

a) With reference to the source, what changes to the second chamber are proposed? (5)b) With reference to the source, and your own knowledge, explain the arguments for a fully or partly elected second

chamber. (10)c) Make out a case against an elected second chamber. (25)(Total for Question 2 = 40 marks)