House of Lords Reform: Has Godot Arrived?
December 7, 2007
by The Rt. Hon. Jack Straw MP, Lord High Chancellor and Secretary of State for Justice
A summary
After almost a century since Winston Churchill suggested a second chamber of 150 members, 100 elected and 50 appointed, it seems that reform of the House of Lords is finally turning into reality. Several reports, from committees set up and appointed by the Labour government under Tony Blair constituting both MPs and Lords, have in recent years recommended many changes to the Lords. Godot, the man who never arrives in Beckett’s most famous work, to which Robin Cook once compared Lords reform, seemed ready to arrive, as MPs voted, in free votes March this year, for a majority or fully elected second chamber, breaking the deadlock on the matter. However, the Lords rejected all options apart from 100 percent appointed, and Jack Straw assures the reader that he will strive for a “complete reform of the Lords”.
—
The article itself is from the Inner Temple 2007-8 Yearbook, pages 12-13.
by Oscar X T Tang
The Times- 22nd October
http://business.timesonline.co.uk/tol/business/law/article2709537.ece
“High drama of appeals at new Supreme Court may go out on television”
The Supreme Court:
Under the Constitutional Reform Act 2005, the Supreme Court is being created, ending the Lord Chancellor’s position as being the head of the judiciary and the role of the House of Lords as being the highest court in England. The 12 law lords, headed by Lord Bingham of Cornhill, are to become the first justices of the supreme court which is scheduled to open in October 2009 in Parliament Square.
The Court will:
— Hear appeals on arguable points of law of general public importance
— Act as the final court of appeal in England, Wales and Northern Ireland
— Hear appeals from civil cases in England, Wales, Northern Ireland and Scotland and criminal cases in England, Wales and Northern Ireland
— Assume the devolution jurisdiction of the Judicial Committee of the Privy Council. The Commonwealth jurisdiction of the council will remain unchanged.
The current law lords (Lords of Appeal in Ordinary) will remain as members of the House of Lords when the supreme court opens. However new appointees, who will be selected by a new commission, will not be members of the Lords.
Latest news:
Cameras will be allowed to broadcast high-profile hearings, such as the legality of detaining terror suspects without trial, before the new supreme court on television. Judges say that Jack Straw, the Justice Secretary, is keen to permit cameras into the court as part of the aim to make it more transparent. But Straw has indicated to judges that he does not favour allowing cameras into jury trials. Judges widely oppose it because they perceive it as a step towards American-style justice that could damage the nature of court proceedings. Mr Straw has told judges that he wants to proceed but only with their full support. Senior judges are said to be in favour of the plan. (Source: Department for Constitutional Affairs)
Summary by Abirami Ragukaran and Sonum Bagha
House of Lords Reform Proposals
January 5, 2007
The DCA states that: “The Government believes a credible and effective second chamber of Parliament is vital to the health of our democracy.”
There have been numerous proposals as to how this might be achieved.
A chronology of events is available from the UK Parliament website up until March 2000. http://www.parliament.the-stationery-office.co.uk/pa/ld199798/ldbrief/ldreform.htm Article by Alexandra Kelso, Reforming the House of Lords: navigating representation, democracy and legitimacy at Westminster. Parl. Aff. 2006, 59(4), 563-581. Kelso discusses the meaning of representation, democracy and legitimacy in the context of Lords Reform. She then surveys the proposals which have had the most impact on the debate over House of Lords Reform: the 1997 Labour Manifesto, the Wakeham Report in 2000, the 2001 White Paper, the 2002 PASC Report, and the 2002 Joint Committee Report.
http://pa.oxfordjournals.org/cgi/reprint/gsl029?ijkey=y0M12Ql85zqzzAK&keytype=ref
Report of the Royal Commission on the reform of the House of Lords chaired by Lord Wakeham – “A House for the Future” (known as the Wakeham Report, published January 2000): Executive Summary at: http://www.archive.official-documents.co.uk/document/cm45/4534/exec_sum.pdf
Useful overviews at: http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/611734.stm
And http://www.guardian.co.uk/lords/Story/0,,190350,00.html
Full transcript: http://www.archive.official-documents.co.uk/document/cm45/4534/contents.htm
See also: “Constitutional Reform: Next Steps for the House of Lords” (published 2003), together with the reports of the Joint Committee on House of Lords Reform (published 2002 and 2003) and the Government White Paper “The House of Lords: Completing the Reform”. at: http://www.dca.gov.uk/constitution/holref/holrefindex.htm
Fifth Report of the Public Administration Select Committee (published February 2002). http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm200102/cmselect/cmpubadm/494/49402.htm See press release and summary of findings at: http://www.parliament.uk/parliamentary_committees/public_administration_select_committee/pasc_pn_05.cfm The Government’s response: http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm200102/cmselect/cmpubadm/794/79404.htm
Extracts from the abovementioned reports are found in Fenwick and Phillipson, Text, Cases and Materials, pp. 341-417.
The most recent proposals:
House of Lords Reform Bill mentioned in Queen’s speech in 2005. Not yet introduced. http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/4554271.stm
On 15 November 2006 at the opening of the Parliamentary Session, the Queen stated in her speech that the government ”will work to build a consensus on reform of the House of Lords and will bring forward proposals.” http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/6152534.stm
Jack Straw, as Leader of the House of Commons, has the unenviable responsibility of reaching a cross-party consensus as to the reform of the upper chamber, whilst maintaining the pre-eminence of the Commons. His plans were leaked in the Sunday Times on 22 October 2006. http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,2087-2416022_1,00.html
See review of this at:http://politics.guardian.co.uk/lords/story/0,,1928945,00.html
Lord Cunningham, chairman of the Joint Committee on Conventions is charged with broadly the same task as Straw and has recently unveiled a new report. See excellent article by Geoffrey Howe in the FT on 2 January 2007.http://www.ft.com/cms/s/ef45c328-9a8a-11db-bbd2-0000779e2340.html
and further details at: http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/6163398.stm
See speech by Lord Cunningham in House of Lords debate on 5 December 2006 (scroll down to relevant paras): http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/ld200405/ldhansrd/pdvn/lds06/text/61205-0001.htm
Tony Blair has stated that the reform of the House of Lords will only proceed if a consensus is reached and has pledged that any reform will not be pushed through using the Parliament Acts. http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/6085746.stm
Survey on failed proposals concerning the second chamber up until 2005:http://www.parliament.uk/commons/lib/research/notes/snpc-02973.pdf
Recent special report from the Guardian: http://politics.guardian.co.uk/lords/0,,442877,00.html
See also BBC Key stories on House of Lords reform, including cash for peerage investigations (see links on following page)http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/4848746.stm
MPs vote for elected second chamber March 2007
“The Commons voted unexpectedly by 337 to 224, a majority of 113, in favour of a 100 per cent elected Lords.” Some might see this as a delaying tactic over future reform for others it is a landmark in the modernisation of the British Parliament.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2007/03/08/nlords08.xml
Conventions
January 2, 2007
Labour’s constitutional reform package raises questions about the nature and existence of some constitutional conventions.
Relationship between the House of Commons and the House of Lords
The Joint Committee on Conventions addresses such questions under its remit:
“accepting the primacy of the House of Commons, … to consider the practicality of codifying the key conventions on the relationship between the two Houses of Parliament which affect the consideration of legislation, in particular:
(A) the Salisbury-Addison convention that the Lords does not vote against measures included in the governing party’s Manifesto;(B) conventions on secondary legislation; (C) the convention that Government business in the Lords should be considered in reasonable time; (D) conventions governing the exchange of amendments to legislation between the two Houses;”
See http://www.parliament.uk/parliamentary_committees/joint_committee_on_conventions.cfm
The Committee have now published a report of their findings, dated 3 November 2006.
http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/jt/jtconv.htm
(The report is fairly lengthy and contains weighty annexes – just read the relevant sections. For example, we talked in class about whether the Salisbury Convention would be undermined if we had an elected second chamber. See pp 24-31 Volume 1 of the November 3 2006 Report).
Scottish Devolution – the Sewel Convention
A Memorandum by the Scottish Executive describes the Sewel Convention as follows:
“The Sewel convention is part of the devolution settlement, and is reflected in the Memorandum of Understanding between the UK Government and the Devolved Administrations. The convention is that Westminster will not normally legislate with regard to devolved matters in Scotland without the consent of the Scottish Parliament. Where the Executive considers it appropriate that provisions on devolved matters should be included in a Westminster Bill, it will invite the Scottish Parliament to signify its consent to this by means of a Sewel motion, having explained the purpose and effect of the provisions in question in an Executive memorandum. If the Parliament approves a Sewel motion, the Minister for Parliamentary Business will write to the Leader of the House of Commons conveying the Parliament’s agreement and informing him of the terms of the Parliament’s resolution.”
