The House of Lords – it’s still relevant
A symbol of filthy bureaucracy that is completely abhorrent and incomprehensible in today’s society or testament to the history of British democracy, the House of Lords has divided opinions for many years.
Whatever you think of the House of Lords, though, you have to recognise that it has a crucial part to play in the law-making business of Britain. Everything not in the government’s manifesto must be passed by Peers in the Lords. They revise the laws, sending them back to Parliament with changes made to improve them. Without the Lords, Theresa May (or any majority government) could effectively do what they choose.
So the House of Lords is definitely necessary; it’s just out of date.
The 1999 House of Lords Act intended to remove most of the hereditary peers, also known as those who are only in there because of their rich and powerful ancestors who probably opened their wallets at the right time. Unfortunately, there are still 92 of them remaining.
While it is currently completely filled with those who do not represent this country, if reformed, the Lords could be something great. Abolishing it would give governments too much power and we would most certainly run the risk of an oppressive – even a totalitarian-like – government.
What the House of Lords needs is an independent committee to select worthy nominees based on experience, passion and their ability to do the work required. They should be nominated by people and government and be experts in their field. This way, the diversity and experience of this country could be reflected in its legislative body and the government could still be held to account with prime effect.
Real reform could deliver real results. Don’t abolish the future, abolish the present holding us back.