Skip to site navigation

Letter to the Times: Lords reform

13 August 2012

Meg Russell’s letter in The Times

Sir, Lord Steel of Aikwood (“Clegg will look petulant if he walks away”, Aug 8) has suggested that the Constitution Unit might assist in finding the long-term way forward on Lords reform. We would of course be happy to do so. But he is also right that Clegg and Cameron should now be pressed to put through lesser but essential reforms, having abandoned their more ambitious Bill. The chamber has become too big, and the patronage enjoyed by the Prime Minister is indefensible. He still decides how many peers are appointed, when, and from which party. Also indefensible is the absurd system of “by-elections” to replace the remaining hereditary peers when they die.

As David Steel has emphasised, all agree that reforms to end these anomalies are necessary and would strengthen Parliament. The only disagreement is over whether they are sufficient. Nick Clegg told the Commons on May 17 last year that “the key thing is not to make the best the enemy of the good. That approach has stymied Lords reform for far too long”. He was right, and he should remain true to that principle now.

Join the Debate

Blog

News

The English Question comprises two broad questions, with half a dozen different answers

Thu, 25 Sep 2014 13:00:49 +0000

The Constitution Unit conducted a three-year research project into the English Question, with a team of ten people led by Robert Hazell. This blog post summarises their main findings and conclusions. For a more concise introduction to the English Question and the points discussed here, see Robert Hazell’s “Bluffer’s guide“. For their book, see Robert […]

Read more...

The English Question: A Bluffer’s Guide

Thu, 25 Sep 2014 09:00:39 +0000

Robert Hazell offers a quick introduction to all the different answers to the English Question. A more detailed explanation of the reasoning behind the answers can be viewed here.   Devolution to Scotland and Wales and Northern Ireland throws up related questions about the government of England. These fall into two broad kinds: giving England […]

Read more...

UK constitutional reform: No means Yes?

Mon, 22 Sep 2014 10:00:16 +0000

Although a Yes vote would have meant a very obvious change to the existing constitutional structure of the UK, the consequences of the No vote will still be complex and profound. The outcome has already put contentious issues such as the West Lothian question back on the agenda, writes Meg Russell. This article originally appeared in the Observer. […]

Read more...
Mailing List

Connect with us

RSSFlickr

Footer menu