DOOM: House of Lords

[AtW]

"Keir Starmer: I will abolish House of Lords to ‘restore trust in politics’

Exclusive: Labour leader plans a new elected chamber after accusing successive Tory governments of handing peerages to ‘lackeys and donors’

Keir Starmer will abolish the House of Lords and replace it with a new elected chamber as part of plans to “restore trust in politics”, the Observer understands.

In a sweeping constitutional overhaul, the Labour leader has told the party’s peers that he wants to strip politicians of the power to make appointments to the Lords as part of the first-term programme of a Labour government. Starmer said that the public’s faith in the political system had been undermined by successive Tory leaders handing peerages to “lackeys and donors”.

It is understood that Labour will hold a consultation on the composition and size of a new chamber as well as immediate reforms to the current appointments process. Final proposals will be included in the party’s next election manifesto."

https://www.theguardian.com/politics...st-in-politics

[SueEllen]

Good.

Bye bye Baroness Nadine Dorries, Lord Jo Johnson, Lord Zac Goldsmith, Lord Evgeny Alexandrovich Lebedev, Lord Alan Sugar et al

[AtW]

So what Sir Starmer is really saying is that he isn't expecting to win.

[ladymuck]

I do agree with constitutional reform. Lords (and Ladies) shouldn't be created without one being removed, or created when one dies. They all need to commit to doing at least minimum number of days a year in the chamber/committees and whatnot and if they dont, irrespective of the reason, then their title is removed.

[xoggoth]

Actually agree with him for a change.

[_V_]

Electoral reform is long overdue, replace the house of lords with a modern upper chamber, and proportional representation please.

[malvolio]

Electoral reform is long overdue, replace the house of lords with a modern upper chamber, and proportional representation please.

Yes, the Lords needs reform. Anything other than an elected membership would be foolish, however...

1. Numbers must be limited, to no more than the HoC, ideally a lot less
2. They can replace members who do not contribute regularly.
3. They can themselves nominate members in parallel; that is, they can bring in people who have something meaningful to offer when there is a gap, independently of party-political considerations
4. The Lords should obviously be disconnected from the Honours system, which avoids a lot of other potential rat traps.

But above that structural reform, the other issues are:

1. Re-defining the interface between Lords and Parliament: how much real power would the upper chamber have and under what controls?
2. Should they be party aligned or properly independent (i.e. they are all cross-benchers, free to vote how they choose)
3. Similarly, they should not be able to do a block vote, but work on a straight, quorate majority of all members.
4. Leading on from point 2, PR would be a nonsense imho, since that requires you are a party appointee at some level. Appointment should be on merit, not manipulated votes.

And finally do we really need to waste a lot of government and parliamentary time on this at this point, when there are significantly more important things to deal with? I know this is one of Starmer's pet ideas, but it is populist, not pragmatic.

[SueEllen]

Constitution reform is always going to have to have "time wasted" on it when there are other important things to deal with.

[malvolio]

Constitution reform is always going to have to have "time wasted" on it when there are other important things to deal with.

It is a waste when the constitution isn't actually broken. This proposal is not about government, it's about cost saving and virtue signalling. The lords as it currently is, manages to scrutinise and criticise government proposals - which is its primary role - fairly successfully and despite the dead wood it currently carries. It could be a lot better, but it is not on any critical path.

[hugebrain]

Yes, the Lords needs reform. Anything other than an elected membership would be foolish

One of the most important functions of the Lords is to give us some slight protection against the tyranny of the majority. An elected house of lords would be completely pointless for this. We already have a bunch of useless elected people and don’t need any more.