The names of six new Lib Dem peers have been published today. They are:
There’s an equal split of three men and three women and five of the six have direct experience of local government from around the country.
By the way, to the question of why do the Lib Dems continue to nominate new peers even while wanting to do away with the unelected House of Lords, the answer is very simple. It’s the same reason we contest elections under first-past-the-post while continuing to support its reform: you have to be in it to deliver change.
Nick Clegg had this to say about the new peers:
“Our new peers highlight the campaigning heartbeat of our party, standing up for their local areas and championing the Liberal Democrat cause to deliver a stronger economy and a fairer society. I am delighted to welcome them all to our Parliamentary team. I know that every new peer on this list will make a valuable contribution to British politics, the House of Lords and the Liberal Democrat team in Westminster. Along with their Liberal Democrat colleagues, I am sure they will take up the mantle of being committed reformers and continue to make the case for a smaller and more democratic upper chamber.”
* Stephen was Editor (and Co-Editor) of Liberal Democrat Voice from 2007 to 2015, and writes at The Collected Stephen Tall.
Follow @libdemvoice.org on Bluesky
Like us on Facebook
Subscribe to our feed
Sign-up for our daily email digest
High Fell leaflet watch (2)
No, Leave didn't win the Brexit referendum because of Northern working class voters
Two new Makerfield by-election polls gives Burnham 5 and 12 point leads
Reform under water
Geoffrey Payne
Richard Whelan
David Raw
Tom Reeve
59 Comments
Yes – but Clegg was and is in charge of Lords reform and he blew it with a dire set of proposals. We can only be glad that they didn’t go through – the voters would just have elected 1 Lib Dem Peer and 24UKIP ones.
Great news. Think it’s Cambridge City Council that Julie is a member of.
@ Caractatus
Well, that would have been a democratic result. Would have been more legitimate than the current chamber.
Speaking more generally on the appointments:
Given we are stuck with the system we’ve got, I’m very glad to see that our new Peers are either serving Cllrs or former a former council leader of a major city. As per Tony Greaves, at least they can go to the chamber have a current mandate from the people that comes before their appointment to the Lords. I hope they, like Tony, also believe that their appointment to the Lords is secondary to their role as a Cllr in their community.
(Tony, please correct me if I am wrong – I don’t want to put words in your mouth in saying so but I believe you recently wrote in a previous comment thread how you thought of yourself as Cllr Greaves first.)
A good spread of people from different regions.
This list is absurd – why are people who have been elected or appointed leaders of councils being given seats over people who have done much for the party, such as Linda Jack and Gareth Epps. The only thing I can say which is good about this list, is that none of the people on it have (to my knowledge) been appointed simply for donating thousands to the party.
Great to see Barbara Janke on the list – it’s about time there was a LD Lord from the Bristol area.
Surely the best list for many many years. All known to members and activists. All with a record of service to the Party. Virtually all with Local Government and local campaigning experience and as Antony says above – a good geographical spread.
Well done … and at last no rewards to funders we have never heard of.
Congratulations to these six new Appointees. As usual, it is an English list. Why are there no Scots, Welsh or Northern Irish? The House of Lords is still the second chamber of the United Kingdom, yet time after time our party’s new appointees only represent one part of the Union – the part that is already over represented. More grist to Alex Salmond’s mill, I think!
This is a good list but it is disappointing, once again, not to see the East Midlands represented.
Ed
Mark,
I think Lord Smith of Clifton is from Bristol?
Ian,
If you want to look at things in those terms, relative to population or to party membership Scotland probably has more than its fair share of seats among the existing Lib Dem Lords.
That’s Clifton in the City of York Anthony.
An excellent list. And I expect both Linda and Gareth would need emergency resuscitation if they were made peers by Nick Clegg.
Andi, “why are people who have been elected or appointed leaders of councils being given seats over people who have done much for the party”
To be fair, winning control of a local authority is quite a good thing to do for the party.
Well done all.
It is particularly pleasing to finally see a West Midlands Peer – so extra congratulations to Chris Fox.
Colin
Good to see another peer from the North West too!
Just looked at the Tory list – strikes me most of them were appointed as they are business supporters of the Tory party – whilst our list is mostly elected councillors.
Anthony: You have to look at it in those terms when we live in a political union of nations; and clearly other commentators are seeing the list from the point of view of their English region. In six weeks it could be decided to dissolve much of the union, yet our Federal party speaks and acts as if it were only the English party. Who in our party leadership speaks for the UK?
I did scan the list of the party’s peers. Scotland does not appear to be over-represented, but Wales and Northern Ireland are under-represented. I can’t tell the position of Cornwall on the party’s red benches. An opportunity missed. In a few weeks it might be too late.
Firstly congratulations to the six appointees. I hope that they will seek to reform the Upper House from the moment that they enter it.
Unfortunately though on the diversity front, although it is good that 50% of the appointees are women, not one is BME, so the news is not so positive.
Does the leadership in the Party think that there are there no BME members that are worthy to hold this high office?
I can certainly name a few, not least Issan Ghazni, the Chair of EMLD, and the highest ranked BME candidate in the European Elections who would certainly be immensely useful for the Party in the Lords with his grass roots and strategic knowledge, understanding, skills, and ability in promoting equality of opportunity in the private, public, voluntary and political arena.
Ruwan Uduwerage-Perera
Liberal Democrat English Party Diversity Champion
Ethnic Minority Liberal Democrat (EMLD) – Vice Chair
Liberal Democrat South Central Region Executive – Diversity Officer
@Ruwan
You make a very fair point, from my experience of working with him in the past I’m sure Issan would have be excellent choice. Hopefully this will factor into the next list and, like you, I hope they all work hard to seek the Lords reform.
Good list from what I know. I’m on our LP exec (Batley & Spen) with @KathPinnock, and she will be an excellent Peer – challenging from within I’m sure from the start.
@ Ruwan,
We did have 9 out of 99 BAME peers prior to this set of appointments, and a number of them have come in this Parliament – Rumi Verjee, Floella Benjamin, Meral Hussein-Ece, Qurban Hussain, Zahida Manzoor and Raj Loomba – so it seems unfair to accuse the leadership as you have.
Perhaps if there was more coverage of events in the Lords, there might be greater awareness of the good work they are all doing.
And here’s another thing – why can’t the party give a seat to somebody under the age of thirty?
Hmmm, my enthusiasm for ex-council leaders is tempered only by the reminder of some of the councils we no longer run.
@Mark Valladares – There are 45 BAME peers from a visible minority, and 828 peers overall, so that is 5.4%. Visible minorities account for 11.9% of the population (excluding ‘other ethnic’ categories), we need to more than double the number of BAME peers to reflect society. Lib Dems are doing slightly better than the average, with 9% of our peers of a BAME background, but they are still under-represented on our red benches. But that’s the detail. I think you’ve completely missed the bigger picture, which is that our party struggles the most out of the main three with our reputation as being a largely white male party. Therefore we have the most to do to catch up, not just in numbers but in image and ‘feel’. And that means we need to do the most to catch up. Research from Lord Ashcroft showed that only 9% of Asians and 6% of Africans and Caribbeans identified with our party in 2010 (compared to a 23% national vote). That support will have almost certainly decreased since being in coalition government. So we will need to try hard to win them back and even harder to reach double figures of support from BAME communities. So today was an opportunity missed. We cannot keep missing them.
@ Ruwan You could also have included Rabi Martins and Qassim Afzal amongst the people that are long overdue a peerage.They have earned the right Both people were pioneers of BME involvement in the Party and have given the Party years of dedidacted service People like Issan Ghazni and Lester Holloway have followed in their footsteps and also done much to attract BME support As Lester says this was an opportunity for Nick Clegg to demonstrate that he values the contribution BME activists make His failure to do so will be seen as a slap in the face for all all BME activists Perhaps it is time they took the hint and left the Party
Andi Ali, whilst the idea of a Peer under 30 is laudable, it isn’t a full time paid position, and not likely to be attractive to someone that age who is probably doing well in their chosen career.
@Mark Vallardares You’re of course quite right that Nick Clegg has appointed more BAME peers than previous party leaders, for which he should be commended. But Lester is also correct, we are underrepresented in both chambers. I’m one of six women from a Muslim background in the Lords from all the parties and cross benches. We have a population of 2.7m. In addition, we have no BAME MPs, so we are frequently asked to ‘pick up the slack’ in terms of representation on various bodies, events, & functions. I regularly take part with MPs from the other main parties on a range of issues, because we have no MPs to represent us.
@ Lester,
No, I’m not missing the point, at least not the one I was responding to.
Ruwan was rather harshly judging the leadership for overlooking possible BAME nominees, and I was pointing out that six BAME Liberal Democrats have been nominated in this Parliament, which represents rather more than 11.9% of those nominated by the Party overall, I note.
Now, you have a valid point about the picture in its totality, even if I retain my sense of unhappiness when an EMLD activists discounts those of us of mixed race.
But, and this is a caveat that may or may not be seen as important, by sending prominent BAME activists, such as Issan, to the Lords, you remove them from the pool of potential MPs. And, given that the visibility of an MP, as opposed to a Peer, is far greater, that might present us with a problem or two down the road.
@Mark Valladeres – Mark you win the prize for the most original reason for overlooking all the BME activists who have given selfless service to the Party,served as councillors, served on Federal Committees etc etc etc > > ” you remove them from the pool of potential MPs. And, given that the visibility of an MP, as opposed to a Peer, is far greater, that might present us with a problem or two down the road <<" Others have spent the last decade telling BME activists they do not have what it takes to be an MP Now you tell us if Nick gives talented capable deserving BME individuals an opporunity to serve the Party and the country in the House of Lords he will be robbing us (BME activists) of the opportunity to show off how good we really can be through media publicity… mmm very interesting !
@Meral is right about BAME peers having to pick up the slack because we don’t have the MPs, so our peers debate in public events with MPs from Labour and Conservatives. But it’s worse; the number of public events in parliament alone targeted at various BAME communities mean if the organisers want a BAME Lib Dem representative there aren’t enough peers to go around! I alone have debated with Labour and Tory MPs over six times in the last year in parliament, and I was just a humble councillor and am not even that now. Others like Ruwan and Issan have had to do likewise. As pleased as I am to do this, the very fact that we’re not even parliamentarians while the other parties always put up BAME MPs speaks volumes before we’ve even opened our mouths. I know we’re a smaller party, but even the size we are we should really have six BAME MPs in this current parliament to reflect society. As far as activists not becoming peers so they are removed as potential MPs… that’s a bit of a bizarre argument. Rabi has been a parliamentary candidate I think at least three times, so I don’t know how many times he needs to try! HQ were encouraged to make more use of Floella Benjamin and are doing so, but as the only parliamentarian of African or Caribbean heritage I’m already picking up the feedback that goes ‘okay you have Floella, but who else?’ Meanwhile Labour have been using their MPs not just for presentational purposes but to actually round up support from organisations that had previously drifted away under Brown, and probably a good slice of their networks, especially under the umbrella of Labour’s new race equality strategy. So BAME parliamentarians are not just good for appearances!
I am thrilled by all the extra Councillors, and even one from an ordinary District (even if it does call itself a City!)
I am happy to call myself Lord where it’s appropriate. At home I prefer to be known as Councillor and I do think that it is a higher office because it requires election!
Tony
@ATF
Tony, thanks for the clarification and wonderfully put.
There are already far too many peers. I. am in favour of a bicameral parliament but a bicameral parliament based upon patronage is appalling.
Surely, what is necessary is a shared reduction of peers, hopefully done in a more proportional way than these appointments.
@ Rabi/Lester,
Perhaps you should read what I say, rather than jump to a hasty conclusion.
I simply make the point that it is self-evident that, if a BAME activist is sent to the Lords, they won’t be available to run to be an MP. So, unless we replenish our pool of BAME members willing and able to be such candidates, there is a possibility that the number of potential BAME Parliamentary candidates will fall, and the likelihood of electing BAME Liberal Democrat MPs falls with it. And, as you correctly note, we aren’t very good at recruitment in BAME communities. So, yes, by all means, campaign for more BAME peers, but we need to recruit the next generation of BAME activists whilst we do so.
And, Rabi, do you really think that most Peers attract much attention compared to MPs? I don’t, and I don’t think that, when others beat the Party with a stick over its lack of BAME MPs, they give us any credit for having sent a few BAME members to the Lords instead.
Well there is a great little discussion going on here, but I throw in this point for consideration, following the new years and dissolution honours list the Lib Dems will have over 100 Peers, all parties are committed to a Lords that broadly reflects the level of party support at the general election, as we emerge from that with a bigger percentage of Peers than our likely General Election vote, what is it we are going to do ?
Local Council by-elections yesterday – one Lib Dem seat lost to UKIP, one seat no Lib Dem candidate (even trade unionists and socialists against cuts stood) one seat Lib Dems got 7 votes …
quite amusingly, for a party that loves europe and hate the lords, post 2015 the lib-dem’s will have virtually no european presence, and rely on the lords for much of its political clout.
Perhaps now the powers that be at Gt George Street, Westminster have started to recognise that achieving a voice in both parliaments comes from a locally campaigning and achieving party out in wider UK that have activists working hard, getting elected and coping with the stringency of Westminster government policies s in many parish, district and county councils. Good to see that the West was not left out, Barbara Janke is one of our best. Well done.
Am I a lone cynic in seeing this as a sop to the councillors and party activists after the pasting we received in May?
@ Martin Land,
Probably not… 😉
But seriously, I agree with those who have welcomed the fact that the Regions have been tapped for nominations – Westminster politics, and policy making in general, are too London-centric, and more voices from beyond the M25 will hopefully go some way to challenge that.
@Mark Valladares
I suspect that you have realised by now that the BME members responding here do not quite agree with your stance about my sentiments being harsh.
If we wish to be the seen as the Party of equality and fairness then we need to do a lot more than merely come out with laudable rhetoric. EMLD is trying it level best to increase BME representation in the Party but sadly we are not very well represented ourselves in positions of influence, so the communities from which we hail, and the wider communities with whom we work with question, not ours, but the Party’s commitment to greater inclusivity.
EMLD will continue to work within and externally to assist in creating a more reflective Party, but please hear us out before shouting us down, in fact why not actively join us as you have stated that you are of mixed heritage, as are many of us within EMLD.
Ruwan Uduwerage-Perera
Liberal Democrat English Party Diversity Champion
Ethnic Minority Liberal Democrat (EMLD) – Vice Chair
Liberal Democrat South Central Region Executive – Diversity Officer
Pam Tilson – Oh I don’t know… I would imagine quite a lot of people under 30 would jump of the chance in the lords particularity as the pay is 300 hundred a day and the benefits that go with it..
One of many reasons why I would never vote Liberal Democrat is that the current leadership is not really interested in electoral reform. How on earth can anyone justify this latest addition of life peers to the unelected House of Lords? Plus, the idea that by creating a few more Lib Dem peers somehow the case for reform will be strengthened doesn’t wash either because once they are on the gravy train they never want to get off. And this country has the nerve to lecture others about democracy!
@Colin Mass
If there weren’t Liberals in the Upper Chamber then there would hardly be anyone there to vote for its reform. We don’t agree with FPTP but if we don’t engaged with it we wouldn’t have MPs or Councillors. As per EU reform, if we aren’t in it we can’t do anything to aid reform.
@ Ruwan,
6 out of the 40 new Liberal Democrat peers appointed since the last election have been BAME, or 15%, so I do think that your criticism is harsh, whether EMLD activists think so or not. And you’re not being shouted down – I simply disagree with your stance in that respect.
And frankly, given that EMLD only seem to care about visible minorities, I am made to feel, effectively, like a second class ethnic minority in its eyes – not as valid, not as worthy – so I think that I’ll politely rebuff your invitation.
Nobody *ever* “earns” the right to be appointed a legislator for life. It’s disgusting. At the very least while playing this undemocratic game we could insist that anyone we appoint signs a covenant that they will take leave of absence after a particular period. Or something. Anything other than appointed legislators for life. Arguments about the racial, gender or other characteristics pale compared with the affront to democracy “represented” by legislators for life. #abolishthelords
“By the way, to the question of why do the Lib Dems continue to nominate new peers even while wanting to do away with the unelected House of Lords, the answer is very simple”
Yes, it is simple. The answer is that there is no sincere desire to do away with a system from which an elite group of party grandees so largely benefits.
@Mark Valladares actually EMLD has been working with central and eastern European members in the party with regards to setting up new AO’s and chair Issan Ghazni spent a great deal of the European campaign working with them in E Midlands, including writing articles on this esteemed website!
This is a great list and excellent to see the strength and expertise in the party outside of the South East being recognised. Having been looking at this issue for the last year I can assure people that there has been a desire to see more people with good council experience in the Lords so in no way is this a sop. While we are stuck with this ridiculous system of creating a second chamber it is really important that our people there are good at what they do. Yes, it could be more representative but this is a good list. By the way £300 a day is only payable on the days the House sits and occasional committee work on non sitting days. Expenses are not great for London either.
@ Sue Doughty,
I understand the point you are making, but people like myself do not want any more patronage and an increase in the numbers sitting in the House of Lords. We want a reduction and then the eradication of both.
I just wish that the Liberal Democrats had made a principled stand. It seems to me that that is the only way of the party redeeming credibility with the man or woman in the street.
@Mark Valladares
I am deeply sorry if you believe that “EMLD only seem to care about visible minorities” for this is not a reality, albeit I do not take this away as your perception. If you believe that you have been made to feel “second class” then I can only apologise on behalf of EMLD for I am not aware of any of the current Executive member who would do this, and I would like to hear more about the occasion/s that this has happened, so that EMLD can develop processes and procedures to counter this perception.
EMLD as Lester has highlighted continues to work with a wide range of communities of all ethnicities, and regarding immigration, the majority of the issues have involved people of European descent who are less visible, but treated appallingly. EMLD also highlighted the situation of Gypsy/Roma and other Travelling communities in its policy paper on Education and Employment that has been accepted as Party policy, again these communities are not visible in the sense of pigmentation, but are questionably the most discriminated against in this country.
Under the Chair-ships of both Meral and Issan, EMLD has be overtly championing not only ethnicity related matters, but championing for ALL equalities issues, for BME communities are represented within all of the Protected Characteristics, and lets face it, a bigot is a bigot and simply hates. Issan does not only take this very inclusive approach within politics, but also professionally, and as a result of his leadership the Party has received far more positive feedback about such issues than previously, hence another reason why many people feel that he would make a worthy Peer and role model.
I will again put out the hand of friendship and will continue to do so, and ask that you and anyone who is interested in the development of an anti-racist agenda becomes an active member of EMLD. EMLD will only achieve its vision with the overt support and assistance of the wider Party membership.
Ruwan Uduwerage-Perera
Liberal Democrat English Party Diversity Champion
Ethnic Minority Liberal Democrat (EMLD) – Vice Chair
Liberal Democrat South Central Region Executive – Diversity Officer
Just thought it worth noting that the number of comments on this thread, are at the half century mark. Comments which are in the main, dedicated to unelected privilege, and the kowtowing to unelected privilege.?
Nice. This is what the voters like to see?
In the light of Lester and Ruwan’s comments about visible minorities this blog from Lester about the selection of Layla Moran is of interest
http://cllrlesterholloway.wordpress.com/2013/01/25/does-selection-of-white-bame-politicians-make-a-difference-for-visible-minorities/
@Rabi Martins “Others have spent the last decade telling BME activists they do not have what it takes to be an MP”
Surely no Lib Dem has said that.? Can you give names and examples please because I am not sure anyone who said should be in any position of authority in the party.
These are goods and worthy people but surely there are far too many in the Lords – when can we expect a cull of those who no longer contribute?
I think this is a great list and I am really happy that our party is putting forward Councillors and activists for the Lords (rather than just giving peerages out for cash).
This not only means that they do have some democratic mandate to be there, but also allow those who are still in office to use more levers to undertake their work for the good of their local community and wider society.
Not getting into the representative debate itself, I, personally, think Meral is someone who would make a fantastic representative in the lords. This is not actually anything to do with her background, but because she is so hardworking and effective at the work she does. I admit I have only seen her work from outside, but I have also never seen anyone work so hard on so many different things without ever asking for anything in return.
Colin Moss
One of many reasons why I would never vote Liberal Democrat is that the current leadership is not really interested in electoral reform. How on earth can anyone justify this latest addition of life peers to the unelected House of Lords?
Appointing people to keep the balance roughly in line with the parties’ share of the national vote in the last general election is the nearest we can get to an elected House of Lords. We would be nearer if we elected our nominees for party posts in the House of Lords, if the other parties wish to do it by The Leader having the sole say, that’s up to them, but why should we do it that way?
The Labour and Conservative parties have connived to keep the House of Lords as it is, and there’s a lot of value in having this second chamber, so I think we have to work with it as it is. If people want it reformed, then they have to vote Liberal Democrat to do so – Labour’s action on our last attempt to reform it shows they have no real interest in making changes.
Lawrence Patterson
These are goods and worthy people but surely there are far too many in the Lords – when can we expect a cull of those who no longer contribute?
When we have an elected House of Lords. If it was done through party lists (and I think it should be, with the Commons through STV) it wouldn’t be too different from what we have now, given that the party lists would be something like the existing party members of the Lords. But as the number would be limited, those who no longer contribute wouldn’t be on them. Plus, of course you could have lists of bishops and even hereditary peers, so that those who like that sort of thing could vote for them.
However, as I said, we don’t have an elected House of Lords because the political parties which most people vote for have scuppered the idea.
@Liberal Al – Meral Ece IS, not would be< a fantastic Liberal Democrats person in the Lords who also happens to be BME As you say she is a trirless worker and a true champion of Equalities A top rate role model for aspiring women and BME politicians