There’s been quite a lot of muttering from politicians about now Lords reform, although featuring in the manifestos of all three main parties at the general election, might not quite be needed or quite yet. That’s even included, regrettably, Liberal Democrat ranks in the Lords.
But Tom McNally, Liberal Democrat leader in the Lords, gave those who think 100 years hasn’t been long enough to think about change or that democracy isn’t what Parliament requires, short shrift in the latest Liberal Democrat News:
One hundred years ago the Liberal government committed itself to a second chamber “constituted on a popular basis instead of hereditary basis”. A hundred years later it makes even more sense that in a modern democracy those who make the laws should be elected by the people…
Reforms there must be if the Lords is not to sink into public contempt.
Well said Tom.
(If you agree with Tom and want to help campaign for Lords reform, there’s a grassroots Liberal Democrats for Lords Reform Facebook page you can sign up on.)
Follow @libdemvoice.org on Bluesky
Like us on Facebook
Subscribe to our feed
Sign-up for our daily email digest
How did people cross the Humber before the bridge?
How Home Secretaries change immigration rules without telling Parliament
The wrong bridge - lost Reform UK in blunder
Christine Jardine "will not be Lib Dem candidate" at next election
Jason Connor
colin murfin
David Murray
Galen Milne
Richard BIRD
3 Comments
August 18th 1911 – the enactment of the Parliament Act. Celebrate Thursday, August 18 2011 ! TEA, TOUR and TALK at Llanystumdwy (Lloyd George’s boyhood home) – Museum, Theatre etc Wait for further details !! or contact me [email protected]
“One hundred years ago the Liberal government committed itself to a second chamber “constituted on a popular basis instead of hereditary basis”.”
That doesn’t really prove anything. The simple fact that a party supported something one hundred years ago doesn’t prove that it is or was a good idea. The Fabian Society supported eugenics one hundred years ago; should we expect them to try and finish the job now by rounding up the mentally ill and sterilising them?
“A hundred years later it makes even more sense that in a modern democracy those who make the laws should be elected by the people…”
Firstly, why would a democratic Senate do its job better than the current Lords? Secondly, what’s all this “it makes even more sense” stuff? If democracy is good, then surely it is good independent of the time period; it doesn’t become more or less good based on what century it is.
“Reforms there must be if the Lords is not to sink into public contempt.”
Is there any evidence that there is a danger of this happening? As far as I can see, most people seem to have more contempt for the MPs in the Commons than the Peers in the Lords.
As long as the voters see we are only interested in House of Lords Reform we will never win any further elections! We have become a party with only one aim – to get rid of the Lords.
We have far more important priorities – let’s get on with them and put this one to the bottom of the list once and for all. It can be tackled (if at all and I’m not convinced of its necessity anyway) the next time around, if we get a “next time around”. If we go on as we are we will be signing our own death warrant as a Party!