In his speech at the University of Edinburgh Business School, Lord McFall, Speaker of the House of Lords, acknowledged that when thinking about the House of Lords, “the image which almost certainly springs to your mind will be the ranks of ermine-clad peers assembling in their finery for the State Opening of Parliament.”
Indeed, much recent discourse around the House of Lords has centred around the archaic, ritualistic aspects of British society which the House represents and, in some ways, perpetuates. Currently, the House of Lords is the second largest parliamentary chamber in the world, with no fixed number of seats. Its purpose is to expertly review and recommend changes to proposed legislation, as well as hold the government account. Although it can delay bills, as a secondary chamber it cannot block most bills. Instead, its role is advisory.
MPs recently voted in favour of a bill to abolish the remaining 92 hereditary peers. The bill would also introduce a mandatory retirement age of 80, something that Lord McFall, born in 1944, would be directly affected by. The Liberal Democrats have pushed even further, campaigning for peers to be elected, rather than appointed by the monarch on the advice of the prime minister.
While Lord McFall did not directly comment on the ongoing plans for reform, when speaking to The Student, he acknowledged that some level of reform seemed increasingly necessary, with a particular need to “reduce the size of the House” and “for a more transparent appointments process.”
However, he was quick to emphasise that despite some limitations, the House of Lords remained essential for “checking and challenging the government and public policy.” Lord McFall was elected Speaker in 2021 by the Lords and before that served as an MP between 1987 and 2010. His achievements in politics range from establishing Scotland’s first national park to working on the Good Friday peace agreement as Minister in the Northern Ireland Office. Reflecting on his experiences in politics, his speech focused on the idea of “politics as a common endeavour” – and the House of Lords as a means of achieving this. He outlined key issues that Britain will be facing over the next years, including decreasing carbon emissions, managing Artificial Intelligence, and reducing inequality. He argued that all of these areas would benefit from the long-term strategic thinking of the House of Lords, allowing for more in depth and nuanced perspectives on complex policy issues.
Many students shared this view; Joe, a History and Politics student said: “I think there is real value in having a less partisan, expertise-based chamber. By convention they give way to the House of Commons, so it doesn’t interfere with democracy, and I do think the added value of their expertise outweighs the democratic deficit of it being unelected.” Helena, a Social Anthropology and Politics student, agreed stating that “there is a good balance of power between the houses.” Some were more critical, with Jacob, an Economics and Politics student, arguing that the House of Lords’ lack of power means that “there is no effective legal or constitutional check.” What all the students agreed upon was the need for reform, whether that be abolishing hereditary peers, the Lords Spiritual, or patronage.
Yet considering how little representation and influence young people have in politics, these discussions can often seem futile. When asked about the lack of diversity in the House of Lords, Lord McFall argued that there is significant representation of disabled people, which Emma Crewe, in her 2005 study, largely attributed to the old age of many peers. In relation to the lack of ethnic minorities, Lord McFall responded that “there are always areas that will fall short.” He did, however, add that “more representation from the nations and regions in the House of Lords would be welcome,” a topic that is closer to home for the former teacher from Dumbarton in the West of Scotland.
As a staple of British democracy, the House of Lords is unlikely to be totally abolished any time soon. Reform is slow and peers are unlikely to willingly give up any of their power. The nature of the House of Lords means that perhaps one of the few ways we can exercise restraint on it is through informing ourselves on how it works. Participation in democracy is not confined to voting every four years. Ensuring governmental bodies are consistently held publicly accountable, through everything from conversations with friends, to social media, to attending talks by the university, are equally important. Informing ourselves means that when propositions for reform do appear, we can be involved in the debate.
Image via Lord McFall.