The House of Lords has been dealt a significant blow. The last remaining 92 hereditary peers have finally been evicted as a result of Labour’s initial pledge in 1999 to remove all hereditary peers and to reform the House of Lords. Many people have written about the lords, and so I don’t want to repeat all of their well-thought out arguments. I will however raise a few issues with this development and give thanks to the hard working peers that are leaving us behind.
For over 700 years, hereditary peers have done their duty, guiding and serving our nation with great respect. Hereditaries are dutybound and have vast family legacies to uphold, which meant that whilst they scrutinised our laws, I always felt that we were in safe hands. The work they did was a thankless task, often going unrecognised by the public because of their perceived lesser value than their MP equivalents. This thankless task often received more scrutiny than praise – with politicians and members of the public attacking them at every decision and yet they continued in their duty to scrutinise our legislation and ensured that we were not being taken advantage of by governments who tried to expand their powers.
Many people believe that the elected chamber has the people’s interests at heart, but in fact it is the lords that have provided the voice of reason. They attempted to delay the Police and Crimes Bill which restricts the right to protest – a fundamental right in any democracy but especially Britain – where we pride ourselves upon freedom of speech. They examined the Assisted Dying Bill and successfully argued that there were not enough safeguards to protect the most vulnerable. The lords have done their duty.
Often falsely, people assume that the lords are mostly Conservative, especially those of the hereditary variety. In reality there were 41 Conservative peers and 39 Labour, Lib Dem, Crossbenchers and non-affiliated peers that were evicted. The political divide is clearly much smaller than a lot of people would imagine. In fact, the political divide is even smaller when we realise that lords are not whipped in the same way as their MP counterparts which means that they can often go against their own party with little consequence. This is particularly important as the world becomes more partisan and democracies across the world struggle to form governments and pass legislation. Our system is designed to ensure that bipartisanship takes place and that we can continue to pass laws on controversial topics with little issue.
The hereditary peers bill is also incredibly important in the constitutional sense. There was a wide debate about whether the Lord Great Chamberlain and the Earl Marshal – both of whom were representatives of the royal family and had key roles in organising ceremonial and political affairs – would be excluded from the bill. However, unfortunately, the bill removed those important roles too. Interestingly both positions are required to be in Parliament regularly, but without Parliamentary passes, they will have to be escorted around areas that they have responsibility over. It is absurd that these vital roles can be removed so easily – especially after the work they have done in organising the late queen’s funeral and conducting work for the king’s coronation. Although there are assurances that they will continue to carry out their work, we have to wonder how easy it will be for them to continue in reality.
Finally we must consider the actual composition of the house and how it is worth having an unelected chamber. I recognise that this is a particularly unpopular position because of how strongly the values of democracy have been instilled into us. However if you look across the world, you will see that the United Kingdom truly does have it best.
The first question that we must all ask is whether the House of Lords is now actually a House of Lords? The remaining hereditary peers have been kicked out and whilst they retain their titles like the other 800 hereditaries, their role in the political life of this country are at an end. Instead the Lords is full of political donors and political appointments. Is this really what the lords should be?
Although there are certainly issues with only life peers being in the House, I know that they will continue to honour the legacy of all the hereditary peers that have left us. The remaining lords have a duty to scrutinise our legislation and hold governments to account and in doing so, they will make the case for the return of the hereditary peers and a surge of interest in the British constitutional system. I sincerely hope that governments in the future will examine all possible options when looking at reforming the upper chamber.
To end this article, I hope you will join me in giving thanks to those that have served us until the very end. Those hereditary peers that have been removed from Parliament despite their valuable experience in politics and the wider world. I will always deeply appreciate the work the hereditary peers have contributed to and I will always recognise and advocate for the House of Lords. I hope that the hereditaries can return to their rightful place one day, but until then I extend the gratitude of the British people to those peers who have done their duty to this country.
