Evaluate the extent to which the House of Lords plays a meaningful role in the passage of legislation. Flashcards
Introduction - Themes
- Scrutiny
- Expertise
- Representation
Introduction - Argument
The House of Lords does not obtain the full legislative qualities of the Commons due to the fact it is unelected, however, this does not mean that they do not play a meaningful role in passing legislation
Disagree - Scrutiny - Point
Prehaps the strongest argument as to why the HOL does not play a meaningful role in the legislative process is the fact that the HOC can easily bypass
Disagree - Scruntiny - Examples
- There have been a number of occassions where legislation has been passed without the approval of the Lords including The Sexual Offences Amendment Act 2000 and The Hunting Act 2004
- The Salibury Convention prohibits the powers of the HOL to scrutinise - this convention means the HOL has to pass anything from the winning party’s manifesto
Agree - Scrutiny - Point
The cases of the HOC bypassing the Lords are few and far between with the last nearly 20 years ago. Aside from this the HOL plays an incredibly meaningful role in scrutinising legislation
Agree - Scrutiny - Examples
- The Retained EU Law (Revocation and Reform) Bill is currently being held up in the Lords as it is proposing to drop 1,500 EU laws
- Secondary legislation has also become an increasing problem and the HOL is one of the few checks on these pieces of legislation. In March 2019, the government was trying to pass 500 statutory instruments
Disagree - Expertise - Point
The HOL is an unelected chamber which means that it lacks both accountability and the constituency link is non-existent. This means they do not play a meaningful role as they cannot be trusted to vote accordingly
Disagree - Expertise - Examples
- There have been accusations of cronyism with the Lords. Boris Johnson appointed his brother in 2020, and 1 in 10 Tory peers have given more than £100,000 to the Conservative Party
- The lack of elections to the Lords means that there is no contituency-peer link, therefore, the peers do not know how to vote on legislation, this makes it harder for elected MPs
Agree - Expertise - Point
The unelected nature of the HOL adds to its meaning within the legislative process, as peers are able to add exepertise and provide representations of groups otherwise marginalised by constituency representation
Agree - Expertise - Examples
- Lord Adonis is a former academic and an expert in economics, education and transport issues
- Baroness Tani Grey-Thompson, a former Paraolympian, had been able to offer representation and expertise of the disabled population. She has debated on many bills to do with disability related issues
Disagree - Representation - Point
Due to its unelected nature, the HOL is incredibly unrepresentative of the UK, this means it cannot be meaningful to the passing of legislation. It lack of a clear party dominance can also make it difficult to agree
Disagree - Representation - Examples
- The House of Lords is not socially representative - more than half the peers are over 70, and 62% privately educated
- FPTP in the Commons means there is a clear party in control most of the time, the Lords does not have this. The Conservatives technically have a majority, but with swing and independent voters it is marginal
Agree - Representation - Point
The HOL is representative in ways that the Commons is not. The lack of elections and security of their position means that peers are not influenced by whips. Smaller parties are also able to gain greater representation
Agree - Representation - Examples
- The HOL is unelected which means it is not subject to the whiping system as in the Commons. As a result, peers are not forced to follow the party line and have much greater free will
- Smaller parties are also represented in the Lords much better - the Green Party, Lib Dems and the DUP all have more seats than in the Commons
