etvt constitutional reforms introduced by NL should BE TAKEN FURTHER Flashcards
examples
what did keir propose 2022
which tory peerages did Keir criticise
L 2024 manifesto reforms
how many lords attended
lord sugar vote
lord example
lord leg improvement
lords holding govt leg acc
scottlands implementations
2012 brummie mayor
% of England covered by devolved bodies
north?
Avs sec of state for home dept HR 2005
replacing the Lords with a democratically elected chamber.
Evgeny Lebedev, David Harding
Remove hereditary peers (Bill introduced in government).
Mandatory retirement age (80) & reformed appointments process (not yet legislated).
Commitment to a more regionally representative chamber
13%
1.96%
timpson
Levelling-Up Act (2023): 64 Lords amendments accepted, mostly technical fixes.
Example: Amendment 117 changed “consult” to “obtain the consent of” for clarity.
2001: Lords forced removal of incitement to religious hatred from anti-terror laws.
April 2024: Lords backed down on Rwanda Bill after six rounds of amendments.
free tuition fees and higher income tax, reflecting its left-wing stance.
27.67%
60%
90%
A v Secretary of State for the Home Department (2004) led to amendments in the Prevention of Terrorism Act 2005 after parts of it were declared incompatible with human rights.
structure
HOL
devolution
HRA 1998
- forHOL
House of Lords reform was incomplete under New Labour:
Stage 1: Only 92 hereditary peers remained.
Stage 2 (elected second chamber) never happened due to lack of agreement.
An elected Lords would enhance democracy, as Parliament should be based on popular consent.
Keir Starmer (Dec 2022) proposed replacing the Lords with a democratically elected chamber.
Criticised Tory peerage appointments (e.g., Evgeny Lebedev, David Harding).
Labour’s 2024 manifesto reforms:
Remove hereditary peers (Bill introduced in government).
Mandatory retirement age (80) & reformed appointments process (not yet legislated).
Commitment to a more regionally representative chamber.
Elected second chamber would improve scrutiny:
Current Lords is weak due to unelected status.
Low participation: 13% rarely/never attend, Lord Sugar voted in only 1.96% of divisions.
Proportional Representation (PR) would boost representation:
No single-party control, reducing ‘elective dictatorship’.
More demographically representative than Lords & FPTP-based Commons
- against HOL
Elected Lords could cause gridlock:
Would have democratic legitimacy, making it more assertive.
Different election timing & PR could lead to clashes with the Commons.
Appointed peers bring expertise, aiding scrutiny:
Lord Mair (geotechnical engineer) chairs Science & Tech Committee.
Lords improves legislation:
Levelling-Up Act (2023): 64 Lords amendments accepted, mostly technical fixes.
Example: Amendment 117 changed “consult” to “obtain the consent of” for clarity.
Lords holds government accountable but ultimately defers to Commons:
2001: Lords forced removal of incitement to religious hatred from anti-terror laws.
April 2024: Lords backed down on Rwanda Bill after six rounds of amendments.
Elected chamber risks excessive partisanship:
Could mirror the US Senate, which is often gridlocked by party politics.
- for devo
Further devolution to England:
Current asymmetric devolution: England lacks the level of representation seen in Scotland, Wales, and Northern Ireland.
An English Parliament would make devolution symmetrical, providing equal representation and enabling policies that reflect English preferences.
Example: Scotland has implemented free tuition fees and higher income tax, reflecting its left-wing stance.
Alternative to an English Parliament:
Regional assemblies (e.g., Greater Manchester City Region with Andy Burnham as mayor) could enhance local decision-making and representation.
Would address regional differences and improve democratic engagement.
Further powers for devolved bodies:
Existing devolved governments (e.g., Scotland) have shown effective governance (e.g., during COVID).
Granting more powers (e.g., transport, welfare, taxes) could move closer to ‘Devomax’ for Scotland.
Example: SNP supports the devolution of immigration policy to Scotland.
- against devo
Lack of demand for English devolution:
There is little public support for an English Parliament or further devolution.
A 2012 referendum on an elected mayor in Birmingham had a 27.67% turnout, indicating low interest in regional government.
English Parliament could cause tensions:
An English Parliament would create another layer of government, leading to conflicts between it and the UK Parliament.
Given that 85% of the UK population lives in England, it could become a very powerful institution, potentially clashing with the central government.
Regional assemblies may create tensions:
Regional assemblies could face tensions with local councils, with the risk of urban interests dominating over rural concerns.
Areas with weak regional identity, like Berkshire, may struggle to generate support or attention.
Devolution has already gone far enough:
64% of England’s population is already covered by devolved bodies and elected metro mayors.
Over 90% of the population in the North is covered by devolution.
Existing devolution has not proven effective:
Scottish education has lagged behind England in international rankings despite SNP reforms.
The Northern Irish Parliament is often suspended due to political deadlock, making it questionable to grant further powers to a system that is not functioning effectively.
- for HRA 1998
Human Rights Act 1998 (HRA): Enshrined the European Convention on Human Rights into UK law, allowing rights to be defended in UK courts.
Argument for Further Reform:
HRA is not entrenched and can be repealed by a simple Act of Parliament.
Parliamentary sovereignty remains intact, meaning Parliament can override human rights protections.
Examples of Limitations:
Illegal Migration Bill (2023): Likely incompatible with the HRA, but government proceeded with it.
Safety of Rwanda Act (2024): Allows deportation of asylum seekers to Rwanda, overriding the HRA and international law.
This undermines individual rights and judicial review.
Proposal for Reform:
Introducing a British Bill of Rights that is entrenched in the constitution.
Empowering the Supreme Court to strike down laws that violate these rights.
- against HRA
Argument Against an Entrenched Bill of Rights:
Would increase the power of unelected, unaccountable, and unrepresentative judges.
Judges would make political decisions about rights, reducing the power of Parliament.
Parliamentary sovereignty ensures that elected representatives make these decisions and are accountable to the people.
Argument in Defence of the Human Rights Act:
The HRA already provides a robust framework for protecting rights.
Since its introduction, the UK has developed a ‘rights-based culture’ where all new legislation is compliant with the HRA.
Judges can declare laws incompatible with the HRA, but Parliament can address these issues, maintaining sovereignty.
Example: A v Secretary of State for the Home Department (2004) led to amendments in the Prevention of Terrorism Act 2005 after parts of it were declared incompatible with human rights.
The Joint Committee on Human Rights ensures bills are compatible with the HRA, showing its persuasive influence.
LOA
no
