User:LordsReform/Consultation & Public Debate

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

For main article see: Lords Reform

Contents

[edit] Introduction

In Novemember 2001, the government initiated a public consultation with the words:

Within the boundaries of its electoral mandate, the Government is keen to seek consensus. Accordingly, it welcomes views on what is proposed. In some important areas, including the length of term for elected members in the reformed Lords, it has not put forward a single proposal, but set out options for consultation.[1]

It intends to introduce legislation thereafter, incorporating decisions on the issues raised in the consultation.[1]

[edit] The Governments Priniciples for Reform

The House of Lords should be
  • A revising and deliberative assembly - not seeking to usurp the role of the House of Commons as the pre-eminent chamber;
  • Composed of a membership appropriate to its revising and deliberative functions, and not duplicate or clone the Commons.
  • Political in approach - but not dominated by any one political party.
  • Representative of independent expertise and of the broader community in the UK - but not disrupt the relationship between elected members of the Commons and their constituents.[1]

[edit] Names

Second chamber [2]

[edit] Proposals (Alphabetical)

[edit] Allotment

 Please help improve this section by expanding it.
Further information might be found on the talk page or at requests for expansion.


Under this heading are proposals to Reform the House of Lords by selecting the members of the upper house using allotment also known as sortition(random selection by open ballot)

Bodies, Roles, Membership & Selection
Commons: There will be no change to the main function or selection of the House of Commons. However, the committees in the Commons would be required to act as a quality control check on legislation as the Upper House would no longer carry out this function.
House of Lords: The present members of the House of Lords would be removed from office and replaced with a fixed number of perhaps 100 who are allotted.

The Upper House would no longer act as a revising chamber leaving this role to the committee system in the commons. Instead its prime role would be to ensure that the government carry out its manifesto promises and does not exceed its constitutional authority.

Procedures/Elections

The new members of the upper house would be chosen by allotment (open and random ballot) from all those eligiable to vote in UK elections and hold office for a fixed term. To ensure jurors do not try and avoid their service, they would receive very significant recompense so that there was no personal loss to most jurors. Juror's employment rights would be secured by statute, and provisions made to assist employers through agency staff and/or compensation.

The proceedings will be open to the public and televised.

Variants
  1. To keep a much smaller Second chamber with a role limited to revision and quality control of legislation without any powers to hold back legislation.
Advantages

Proponents of this range of proposals base their concept of democracy on Athenian democracy which was mainly allotted. See Lords Lords Reform/The Meaning of Democracy as Applied to An Upper Chamber for information on the constrating views of democracy that have been used in submissions on Lords reform) Herodotus states the main advantage of allotment as isonomia (equality of political rights). In a modern context this is often used to infer a more demographically representative upper chamber which is statistically similar to the UK voting population.

Disadvantages

The present House of Lords has a large range of skills and draws on a lifetimes experience from ex politicians, civil servants who are mostly highly dedicated despite the low wages.

The role of this new body is ambiguous. E.g. would it or the commons have supremacy? These questions may result in conflict between the commons and this assembly.

See also
External links

[edit] Appointed House

Put flowchart here!
 Please help improve this section by expanding it.
Further information might be found on the talk page or at requests for expansion.

Many of the existing members of the House of Lords and many MPs favour the retention of the House of Lords as a fully appointed body.

Bodies, Roles, Membership & Selection
Commons: Most proposals do not suggest a change to the main function or selection of the House of Commons.
House of Lords: Most proposals retain the present members of the House of Lords.
Procedures/Elections

The Prime Minister and the independent Appointments panel would appoint members.

Variants
  1. That the 92 Hereditary Peers are removed.
Appointments Commission

The Appointments Commission should itself broadly reflect the cross section of the community and should seek and receive nominations to a national panel from which it can propose appointments to the second chamber subject to the ratification of its elected members[3]

Advantages

The Upper House would retain its skills experience and longer term perspective. The Commons clearly retains its supremacy over the Upper house.

Disadvantages

It is not democratic.

See also
External links

[edit] Combination

Put flowchart here!
 Please help improve this section by expanding it.
Further information might be found on the talk page or at requests for expansion.

Proposals falling under this category combine elements from a fully elected and a Wholly appointed House and encompass the whole range of proposals under those categories. The main issue for a part elected, part appointed House is the percentage of Lords, which are elected, and those appointed.

According to Graham Allan MP at the time of the Consultation on reform of the House of Lords "an informal survey of Parliamentary Labour Party backbench opinion arrived at the figure of 58% elected, the conservative Party position is for 80%" and the following table shows the range of views in the PLL on this issue:

Preferred % of the elected element
Region Replies Average
London South 18 51%
London North 17 66%
Scotland 35 48%
Eastern 10 70%
North West (A) 13 68%
North West (T) 19 55%
South West 10 68%
Wales 21 66%
Northern 18 50%
West Midlands 29 51%
Yorkshire 22 55%
South East 10 64%
East Midlands 17 65%
Total 239 58%
Reasons for Part Part

A minority of members ... should be appointed in order to ensure that the second chamber is not dominated by one party, is representative of the national community and can bring to bear experience and insights broadly complementary to the commons(Peter Bradley MP)

Bodies, roles, membership and selection
Commons: There will be no change to the House of Commons.
House of Lords: The powers of the House of Lords will remain as at present. The size of the chamber would be similar.

Because a part-part option has a reduction in the number of Lords rather than keeping them or removing them all, it raises the question of how to select the smaller number of appointed members in the initial house. Various options were suggested:

Procedures/Elections

For procedures to appoint the Lords first see Lords reform - Wholly Appointed for discussion on the form of election first see Lords Reform - Democratically Elected

Variants
  • The main issue is the exact proportion of elected and appointed.

  • Membership of the second chamber should be for the lifetime of Parliament and subject to re-election or reappointment thereafter.

Advantages

By introducing an elected element the House will be more democratic. By retaining some appointed Lords the House will retain some of the skills, experience and longer-term perspective of the current Lords.

Disadvantages
  • One of the main advantages of the present Lords is the range of characters present. By severely restricting the numbers only the most high profile candidates will obtain a place and many of the less obvious candidates that give the Upper house its breath of knowledge will inevitably go.
  • "As politicians we have enough difficulty encouraging people to come out and vote for 100% of the House of Commons" (Charlotte Atkins MP) By electing only a proportion of the House the voter interest will be much lessened and there is a serious risk that turn out for the Lords will be so low as to undermine its credibility.
  • The two different classes of peers will inevitably conflict at times and will undermine each other's legitimacy.
See also
External links

[edit] Democratically Appointed Lords

Flow chart for a democratically appointed House of Lords using a Citizens Jury
 Please help improve this section by expanding it.
Further information might be found on the talk page or at requests for expansion.

Most information on this proposal comes from an organisation called Allot. It only appears in the second consultation where around 10% of respondents supported it. The proposal was to use a democratic citizen's jury as the appointments panel to replace the Lords appointments panelwhich was the government's intended body to appoint the new Lords.

Bodies, roles, membership and selection
Commons: There will be no change to the House of Commons.
House of Lords: The present members of the House of Lords remain in position, though the remaining 92 Hereditary Lords could be removed. The powers of the House of Lords remain as at present. The number of Lords would be similar, but set by statute and each jury would be able to appoint up to this limit.
Lords Appointments Jury: The jury would act as an interview panel for prospective Lords. Like a normal jury professional advocates and a chair would support it in this role. The exact number of jurors is not critical to this proposal but might be 12 jurors with 3 reserves.
The Lords appointments Jury would be chosen by allotment (open and random ballot) from all those eligible to vote in UK elections. The jurors would take office for one year. To ensure jurors do not try and avoid their service, they would receive very significant recompense so that there was no personal loss to most jurors and indeed by being paid the equivalent of an MPs salary on top of their normal income, there would be a positive gain. Juror's employment rights would be secured by statute, and provisions made to assist employers through agency staff and/or compensation.

Procedures/Elections Each year a new jury would be chosen with a number of reserves in case of illness or death.

Applications along with named proposers and seconders would be requested. Anyone would be able to apply and applications would be judged on an equal footing. However, given the nature of the work, one would expect each party leader to put forward their own candidates. Working with a permanent staff, the jury would sift the applications and invite candidates and their supporters to an interview. The candidate, proposer and seconder would be asked set questions by the professional staff, following which the jurors would be able to ask questions either directly or through the chair.

If a majority of the jury vote to accept the candidate, they would then become a new member of the Lords.

The proceedings will be open to the public and televised.

Variants
  • Instead of one jury, each region in the UK has its own jury with a set number of seats in the House. The advantage is that jurors could sit closer to home and that there would be better regional representation. The disadvantages are that many prospective Lords may not have a regional affiliation and the cost of running the juries are likely to increase.
Advantages

This proposal keeps the skills, experience and longer-term perspective of the current House of Lords and makes the process of selection more democratic. By appointing the members using a jury which is literally democratic (juries were the predominant feature of Greek democracy) it creates a democratically legitimate revising chamber whilst avoiding the likely conflict when there are two house that are each democratically elected.

The cost is also low. It involves ordinary people in government in a way that should reconnect the politicians and ordinary people.

Disadvantages
 Please help improve this section by expanding it.
Further information might be found on the talk page or at requests for expansion.
See also
External links

[edit] Elected House of Lords

Put flowchart here!
 Please help improve this section by expanding it.
Further information might be found on the talk page or at requests for expansion.

Proposals under this section cover those who wish to elect all members of the Lords and the elected element of a part-part house.

Bodies, roles, membership and selection
Commons: There will be no change to the House of Commons.
House of Lords: Powers of the House of Lords will remain as at present.
Size of the chamber would be similar.
  • Harold Best MP suggested "at most half of the number of seats in the House of Commons."
  • Peter Bradley MP suggested "considerably less than 600".

Participation of members Peter Bradley MP suggested "members should be required ot participate fully in it activities and functions" & "Those who fail to participate in at least 40% of divisions in the lifetime of a Parliament should be debarred from seeking re-election or reappointment.

Variants
  • First Past the Post, representing county wide constituency (seats based on number of voters) (Harold Best)
  • Proportional Representation

Timing of elections

  • At a different time from elections to Commons (Harold Best MP)
  • Peter Bradley MP suggested that elections to the Lords should be "dependant on and secondary to general election of MPs" (presumably meaning elect lords at general election?)

Term 5, 10 or 15 years were proposed by the white paper[citation needed].

  • Four year term

Firstly, I believe that those in the second Chamber shouold be fully accountable to the people and as such the renewal of their mandate every four years would be better for democracy. Secondly, if the members of the second Chamber were to serve longer terms of office than those is the House of Commons they could claim a greater legitimacy. (Harold Best MP)

Advantages

By electing the House it will be more democratic.

Disadvantages
  • The skills, experience, longer-term perspective and diversity of the present lords would be missed.
  • There would be two conflicting mandates potentially causing conflict between the commons and Lords
  • Voters already fail to turn out at elections. More elections may simply cheapen the idea of elections and result in even lower turnouts particularly for a body, which can't have its own agenda for change.
See also
External links

[edit] Hereditary House

 Please help improve this section by expanding it.
Further information might be found on the talk page or at requests for expansion.
Put flowchart here!

The House of Lords recently moved away from Hereditary membership. Some [citation needed] support the continuation of this principle either in full [citation needed] or part of other proposals.

Bodies, roles, membership and selection
Commons:
House of Lords:

Procedures/Elections

Variants
Advantages

There are advantages of a hereditary House of Lords just as there is to a Hereditary Leader like a king or queen.

Disadvantages

Any continuation of the hereditary principle as the basis for constituting one chamber of Parliament is an affront to modern representative Government[4]

See also
External links

[edit] Indirect Appointments

 Please help improve this section by expanding it.
Further information might be found on the talk page or at requests for expansion.

A range of proposals favoured some kind of indirect appointment, many basing their proposals on the current method of appointment bishops of the Church of England.

I believe that the second chamber should be wholly appointed from the various bodies and organisations from across the country which already represent society as a whole. These would include the various professional organisations, the charity and voluntary sector, business groups, the unions, the various churches, the public sector, local government, the unemployed, students etc. These organisations would elect their own representatives to this second chamber" [5]

Some like Harold Best MP wanted mainly appointments with "the remaining seats made up be representatives from the other aspects of democratically elected government, such as representatives from regional government, the Scottish Parliament, the National Assembly for Wales and so on."

Bodies, roles, membership and selection
Commons: Unchanged
House of Lords: Unchanged
Procedures/Elections
Variants
 Please help improve this section by expanding it.
Further information might be found on the talk page or at requests for expansion.
Advantages
 Please help improve this section by expanding it.
Further information might be found on the talk page or at requests for expansion.
Disadvantages
 Please help improve this section by expanding it.
Further information might be found on the talk page or at requests for expansion.
See also
External links

[edit] No Upper House

 Please help improve this section by expanding it.
Further information might be found on the talk page or at requests for expansion.
Put flowchart here!

This is a proposal by organisations such as ... to select the House of Lords using....

Bodies, roles, membership and selection
Commons:
House of Lords:

Procedures/Elections

Variants
Advantages

it is not the exclusive province of a second chamber but the duty of all of Parliament - and indeed principally of the House of Commons where most legislation originates - to scrutinise the executive and hold it to account.(Peter Bradley)

Disadvantages

when the Government controls a large majority in the Commons, the scope and potential need for the enhanced scrutiny and more effective revision which a second chamber can provide is all the greater (Peter Bradley)

See also
External links

[edit] Stub Option

 Please help improve this section by expanding it.
Further information might be found on the talk page or at requests for expansion.
Put flowchart here!

This is a proposal by organisations such as ... to select the House of Lords using....

Bodies, roles, membership and selection
Commons:
House of Lords:

Procedures/Elections

Variants
Advantages
Disadvantages
See also
External links

Template:Uk-poli-stub