header-logo header-logo

13 December 2007 / Mark Ryan
Issue: 7301 / Categories: Features , Constitutional law
printer mail-detail

Bringing the house down

Mark Ryan explores the progress made thus far in the fiercely contested process of House of Lords reform

The House of Lords gave a first reading to the House of Lords Bill 2007 (HL Bill 3) on 7 November 2007. This private member’s Bill was introduced by Lord Steel and is similar to the House of Lords Bill he put before the house earlier this year. Although this first Bill was also in Lord Steel’s name (hence the sobriquet “the Steel Bill”), it was the result of an all-party group of both houses—the Campaign for an Effective Second Chamber—concerned to secure immediate and effective reform of the upper house.

The first Bill enjoyed a general welcome from their lordships as it received a second reading in July 2007. The second incarnation of the Bill (in an amended form) was introduced when the 2007–08 Parliamentary session opened.

The House of Lords Bill arguably represents the most significant development in terms of House of Lords reform since March 2007, when both Parliamentary houses voted on their preferred option for the composition of a reformed second

If you are not a subscriber, subscribe now to read this content
If you are already a subscriber sign in
...or Register for two weeks' free access to subscriber content

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Anthony Collins—20 promotions

Anthony Collins—20 promotions

20 promotions mark major people investment at national law firm, Anthony Collins

Sidley—Elaine Whiteford

Sidley—Elaine Whiteford

Sidley adds competition litigator Elaine Whiteford in London

Charles Russell Speechlys—Claudina D’Costa

Charles Russell Speechlys—Claudina D’Costa

Charles Russell Speechlys welcomes Claudina D’Costa as Director of Client Development Marketing

NEWS
The 25th Pro Bono Week begins today until 6 November, with events hosted by law firms, chambers, law schools and charities across the UK
Pro bono is celebrating a silver anniversary, with initiatives putting businesses and students at the heart of access to justice
Choosing the wrong expert can cost a clinical negligence claimant more than their case
Judges risk weakening their own independence by staying silent over government reforms, a leading public lawyer argues
A discount on damages does not automatically mean an equivalent haircut for legal costs in military deafness claims
back-to-top-scroll