Tag Archives: hereditary peers

10 reasons why the hereditary peers bill should be amended to constrain Prime Ministerial patronage and the size of the House of Lords 

Posted on by

The government’s House of Lords (Hereditary Peers) Bill reaches its report stage in the chamber this week – presenting a serious moment for possible amendments. Meg Russell argues that peers should amend the bill to place constraints on the Prime Minister’s ability to appoint unlimited numbers of members to the chamber. This level of unconstrained patronage power is inappropriate in a modern age, and brings the House of Lords and politics as a whole into disrepute. It drives the chamber’s ever-increasing size (now standing at over 850), which should be capped at no larger than the House of Commons. Public opinion overwhelmingly supports this change, and it has long been the settled view of the House of Lords. Another legislative vehicle to implement this essential change may not present itself for decades, so peers should seize the opportunity while they can. 

Continue reading →

Monitor 89: The urgency of protecting democracy and the rule of law

Posted on by

Today the Unit published Monitor 89, providing an analysis of constitutional events over the last four months. This post by Alan Renwick and Meg Russell, which also serves as the issue’s lead article, highlights welcome action by the government on devolution, commitment to the rule of law and the removal of hereditary peers from the House of Lords, but calls for stronger action on wider Lords reform, progress on the promised Ethics and Integrity Commission, and action on the pre-election pledge to strengthen parliamentary scrutiny of legislation. It warns that the governments of the UK must strive to maintain healthy checks and balances, avoid polarisation, and foster open political discourse at a time when events in the US are showing the dangers of not doing so.

Continue reading →

Labour’s removal of hereditary peers from the House of Lords: 10 key questions answered

Posted on by

Labour’s 2024 general election manifesto promised to remove the remaining hereditary peers from the House of Lords. Today, the House of Lords (Hereditary Peers) Bill has its second reading in the House of Commons. In this post, Constitution Unit Director and House of Lords expert Meg Russell explores 10 key questions about the bill and Labour’s policy. For example, who are the hereditary peers? How did they get into the House of Lords? How have they survived so long? And what effect will their departure have on the House of Lords? 

  1. How long have the hereditary peers been in the House of Lords? 

The history of the House of Lords is long and complex. It is an ancient institution, but has changed very substantially over the years. The roots of the chamber can be traced to bodies that were drawn together to advise the monarch as long ago as the medieval period. Individuals called to those early assemblies were powerful figures, including major landholders and representatives of the church. Around the 14th century they began meeting separately from others representing the people – so that parliament developed into two distinct chambers, which became the House of Lords and the House of Commons. Initially, there was no guarantee that an individual called to one meeting of the upper chamber would be called to the next. But membership gradually stabilised, and it became established that the members of the nobility who took seats would pass these down the family line along with their titles. By the 13th century the chamber included earls and barons, while the titles Duke and Marquess date to the 14th century 

Continue reading →