subscribe: Posts | Comments

House of Lords reform report out

0 comments

Meg Russell, house of lords, reform, report, launched‘It would be irresponsible for the Prime Minister post-May 2015 to continue with the current unregulated system’.

Since 2010 increasingly urgent concerns have been raised about the size of the House of Lords; the chamber has grown by a third since 1999.

The Prime Minister retains complete control over the number of peers appointed, the timing of appointments, and how these are shared out between the parties (and independent Crossbenchers).

And David Cameron has appointed to the Lords at a faster rate than any other Prime Minister since life peerages began in 1958.

Thus far debates regarding reform have focused primarily on routes out of the chamber – for example via the ‘Steel bill’ (now the House of Lords Reform Act 2014) allowing peers to retire.

But without limiting the way in to the chamber, its size cannot be brought under control.

Successive parliamentary committees have called for an agreed formula setting out how new appointments should be shared between the parties. But to date, no detailed work has been done on the options for such a formula.

But now a new report from the Constitution Unit – supported also by the Hansard Society and the Constitution Society – does the detailed work.

By modelling the effects of three possible appointment formulae on three different electoral scenarios (encompassing small, medium and large changes in party support) it demonstrates how the formula in the coalition agreement of achieving proportionality across the chamber creates unsustainable upward pressure on size.

But it also shows that an alternative formula for ensuring fairness between the parties exists which can allow the size of the chamber to be managed down.

The report makes firm recommendations for change, emphasising that it would be irresponsible for the Prime Minister post-May 2015 to continue with the current unregulated system.

Whether or not larger-scale Lords reform proceeds in the next parliament, there is an immediate need to get a grip on Lords appointments.

This report sets out how to do it.

At its launch last month Baroness Hayman, former Lord Speaker, chaired a debate on its findings. Speakers included Professor Meg Russell, the lead author of the report, Lord Jay of Ewelme a former chair of the House of Lords Appointments Commission, Lord Grocott a former Labour Chief Whip and Conservative MP Jesse Norman MP.

The report not only tests the effects of different formulae against possible election results 2015-25, but it confirms that the formula favoured by the 2010 coalition government has disastrous consequences for size: requiring the chamber to possibly grow beyond 1300 members in 2015, and 2200 in 2025.

But if each new batch of appointments instead guaranteed fairness between the parties, numbers could be stabilised, and even reduced.

Key recommendations in the report include:

Ending prime ministerial control over the number of peers appointed and balance between them – instead handing this control to the independent House of Lords Appointments Commission;

A size limit to be placed on the chamber, 550 or 600;

A clear formula to be applied, basing each new batch of appointments on share of party votes at the previous general election;

The House of Lords Appointments Commission to invite nominations from the parties using this formula, and based on a one-in-two-out principle (i.e. one vacancy for every two peers departing) until the size cap is reached; and

This system to operate until large-scale Lords reform is agreed, which will be a minimum of two years after the general election.

Commenting on the proposals, the report’s lead author and acknowledged expert on Lords reform, Professor Meg Russell, said: “Growth in numbers in the Lords, especially since 2010, are driving up costs and driving down efficiency – and with the general election looming there are rumours of more appointments to come.

“It would simply be irresponsible for the new prime minister post-May 2015 to continue with the present system.

“It is plainly inappropriate in a modern democracy for the head of government to decide the size and make-up of one chamber of parliament, and the size of the Lords now risks spiralling completely out of control.

“This report sets out clearly the principles for a more regulated and sustainable system. The two main party leaders should be pressed to commit to its recommendations with immediate effect.”

The report, ‘Enough is Enough: Regulating Prime Ministerial Appointments to the Lords’ is available for download here.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *