header-logo header-logo

11 October 2024 / Neil Parpworth
Issue: 8089 / Categories: Features , Constitutional law , Public
printer mail-detail

Calling time on hereditary peers?

192564
The Labour government intends to finally see off the ‘rump’ of Lords who inherited their title. Neil Parpworth analyses the proposed reform
  • Potentially ending a process that has lasted a quarter of a century, the House of Lords (Hereditary Peers) Bill aims to break the link between the second chamber and hereditary peerage.
  • This article examines the Bill, the views of its champions and detractors, and its likely timeline. It also considers other changes the government may try to implement in the House of Lords.

On 5 September 2024, the recently elected Labour government introduced a Bill in Parliament consisting of a mere five clauses. Despite its brevity, the House of Lords (Hereditary Peers) Bill is of constitutional importance in that it strives to bring to an end a process which began 25 years ago, when the House of Lords Act 1999 (HLA 1999) first tackled the issue of hereditary peers acting as legislators. While that Act reflected a compromise in the form of a rump of 92 peers being allowed to continue to sit and vote in the House

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