House of Lords Reform developments in the 2010 Parliament Standard Note: SN/PC/7080 Last updated: 12 January 2015 Author: Section Richard Kelly Parliament and Constitution Centre Following the Government s decision in the summer of 2012 to withdraw the House of Lords Reform Bill 2012-13, it said that it had no further plans for House of Lords reform in the current Parliament. However, as a result of pressure from the House of Lords for changes to allow peers to leave a growing House of Lords, the Government announced that it would support a private Member s bill to allow members of the House of Lords to retire. The Bill also provided that members who did not attend and those convicted of serious offences should cease to be members of the House of Lords. Departing members may not return to the House of Lords. The Bill was enacted as the House of Lords Reform Act 2014 and five members of the House of Lords have retired under its provisions. This Note provides a brief overview of key events in House of Lords Reform from the passage of the House of Lords Act 1999 to the 2010 general election. It then outlines the Government s plans for Lords reform which were withdrawn in summer 2012 and notes housekeeping measures that have been made since then. This information is provided to Members of Parliament in support of their parliamentary duties and is not intended to address the specific circumstances of any particular individual. It should not be relied upon as being up to date; the law or policies may have changed since it was last updated; and it should not be relied upon as legal or professional advice or as a substitute for it. A suitably qualified professional should be consulted if specific advice or information is required. This information is provided subject to our general terms and conditions which are available online or may be provided on request in hard copy. Authors are available to discuss the content of this briefing with Members and their staff, but not with the general public.
Contents 1 Background 2 2 Government proposals 3 2.1 Coalition Agreement 3 2.2 Draft Bill 4 2.3 House of Lords Reform Bill 2012-13 5 3 House of Lords Reform Act 2014 6 3.1 The Government s changing view on minimal reform 6 4 Political and Constitutional Reform Committee report House of Lords reform: what next? 7 5 House of Lords (Expulsion and Suspension) Bill [HL] 2014-15 8 6 Issues raised in the House of Lords 9 6.1 Retirements from the House of Lords 9 6.2 Size of the House of Lords 10 1 Background The House of Lords Act 1999 provided for the removal of all but 92 hereditary peers from the House of Lords. The 92 remained to guarantee a second stage of Lords reform. A number of attempts at making progress with the second stage of Lords reform have taken place. In 1999 a Royal Commission on the Reform of the House of Lords, chaired by Lord Wakeham, was established. Its report A House for the Future (Cm 4534) was published in January 2000. The Royal Commission concluded that its proposals, if implemented, would make the second chamber more democratic and more representative. In November 2001, the Government published a White Paper, The House of Lords Completing the Reform (Cm 5291). Following a debate on the White Paper, a joint committee was established. In its December 2002 report, it recommended that both Houses vote on seven options for the composition of the House of Lords: 1. Fully appointed 2. Fully elected 3. 80 per cent appointed/20 per cent elected 4. 80 per cent elected/20 per cent appointed 5. 60 per cent appointed/40 per cent elected 2
6. 60 per cent elected/40 per cent appointed 7. 50 per cent appointed/50 per cent elected 1 In February 2003, the House of Commons rejected all the options and the House of Lords voted in favour of a fully-appointed Chamber. The Commons also rejected an amendment which called for the abolition of the House of Lords. 2 In September 2003, the Government published a consultation paper, Constitutional reform: Next Steps for the House of Lords, and a Lords reform bill was announced in the November 2003 Queen s Speech. The anticipated bill was not published. In February 2007, the White Paper The House of Lords: Reform (Cm 7027) was published. It argued for a bicameral Parliament, outlined a number of principles that should underpin a reformed House of Lords and again proposed that both Houses should vote on the same options for the composition of the House of Lords that had been voted on 2003. The House of Commons debated the White Paper on 6 and 7 March 2007. 3 It supported two options: 1) 80% elected, 20% appointed by 305 votes to 267 a majority of 38; and 2) 100% elected by 337 votes to 224 a majority of 113 In the House of Lords, following a two-day debate on the White Paper on a take note motion on 12 and 13 March, the House voted on the options for composition on 14 March. 4 The House of Lords voted in favour of a fully appointed second chamber and rejected every other option. A cross-party group continued to discuss Lords reform and a white paper An Elected Second Chamber Further reform to the House of Lords (Cm 7438) was published in July 2008. The White Paper indicated that final proposals for Lords reform would have to be included in party manifestos at the next general election. An ongoing research project on The Changing Role of the House of Lords is being undertaken by the Constitution Unit at University College London. Among other things, the Unit has recorded Government defeats in the House of Lords since 1999. 5 2 Government proposals 2.1 Coalition Agreement Reform of the House of Lords was a manifesto commitment for the three main parties at the 2010 election, and was included in the Coalition Agreement between the Conservatives and Liberal Democrats. The Coalition Agreement, published by the Government on 20 May 2010, stated that: We will establish a committee to bring forward proposals for a wholly or mainly elected upper chamber on the basis of proportional representation. The committee will come 1 Joint Committee on House of Lords Reform, House of Lords Reform: First Report, 11 December 2002, HC 171 2002-03, Summary 2 Joint Committee on House of Lords Reform, House of Lords Reform: Second Report, 9 May 2003, HL 97 and HC 668 2002-03, pp6-7 3 HC Deb 6 March 2007 cc1390-1488; 7 March cc1524-1635 4 HL Deb 12 March 2007 cc451-570; 13 March 2007 cc517-609 and cc620-730; 14 March 2007 cc741-759 5 See also, Meg Russell, the Contemporary House of Lords: Westminster Bicameralism Revived, 2013 3
forward with a draft motion by December 2010. It is likely that this will advocate single long terms of office. It is also likely that there will be a grandfathering system for current Peers. In the interim, Lords appointments will be made with the objective of creating a second chamber that is reflective of the share of the vote secured by the political parties in the last general election. 6 2.2 Draft Bill The Government published a White Paper, the House of Lords Reform Draft Bill, on 17 May 2011. 7 This set out proposed reforms to the second chamber, which was still called the House of Lords for the purposes of the consultation, and it included the text of a draft bill to implement them. The core of the proposals was as follows: 300 members in the reformed House of Lords, plus 12 bishops sitting ex officio and an unspecified number of government ministers during their period in office 240 elected members, 60 appointed members (an 80/20 split) 15 year terms, which would be non-renewable Elections for one third of seats at the same time as each general election Single transferable vote system for elections One third of appointed members to be nominated by a statutory Appointments Commission at each election time Link with peerage to be ended; peerages would simply be honours Three phase transition to the new arrangements Members would receive a salary and allowances set by IPSA, and be covered by a pension administered by IPSA For tax purposes Members would be regarded as resident, ordinarily resident and domiciled in the UK The electoral franchise for the House of Lords would mirror that for general elections; but Members of the reformed House of Lords would be able to vote in elections to the Commons A disqualification regime would be introduced, modelled on that for the Commons; Members could resign, and they could be suspended or expelled for misconduct House of Lords reform was the subject of a debate in the Commons on 27 June 2011. 8 A Joint Committee on the Draft House of Lords Reform Bill began its work in July 2011. Its report was published on 23 April 2012. 9 The Joint Committee s recommendations included the following in response to the provisions of the draft bill: There should be 450 members, plus government ministers. A majority agreed that 12 bishops should also sit A majority agreed that the reformed House of Lords should have an electoral mandate, provided it had commensurate powers A majority agreed that 80% of members should be elected and 20% appointed A majority agreed on single, non-renewable terms of 15 years A version of the single transferable vote system should be used for elections to a reformed House of Lords 6 HM Government, The Coalition: Our Programme for Government, 20 May 2010 7 Cm 8077 8 HC Deb 27 June 2011 c646-726 9 Joint Committee on the Draft House of Lords Reform Bill, Draft House of Lords Reform Bill: Report, HL 284, HC 1313, 2010-12 4
The House of Lords Appointments Commission should become a statutory body The Committee reached two other important recommendations. It agreed that clause 2 of the draft bill, which was designed to maintain the primacy of the House of Commons, would not be sufficient on its own to achieve this aim. It also drew attention to the possibility of judicial involvement in the relationship between the two Houses, and recommended that nothing should be included in the final legislation that would allow interference in contravention of Article 9 of the Bill of Rights 1689. Secondly, the Committee recommended, by a majority of 13 to 8 on division, that there should be a referendum on House of Lords reform. 2.3 House of Lords Reform Bill 2012-13 The House of Lords Reform Bill was introduced to the Commons on 27 June 2012 as Bill 52 of the 2012-13 session. The main features were: A three stage transition to a fully reformed House of Lords In the first phase of the transition, after the first election, 120 elected members and 30 appointed members, plus up to 21 Lords Spiritual, an unknown number of ministerial members, and two thirds of existing peers In the second phase, after the second election, 240 elected members, 60 appointed members, up to 16 Lords Spiritual, ministerial members, and one third of existing peers so long as they are transitional members from the first phase After this, 360 elected members, 90 appointed members, up to 12 Lords Spiritual and ministerial members Semi-open list elections for large regional seats ( electoral districts, based on European Parliament seats) in mainland Great Britain Single Transferable Vote system for Northern Ireland A statutory House of Lords Appointments Commission Elected, appointed and ministerial members serve three electoral terms (normally 15 years), and may not serve again Specific senior Bishops serve in the Lords during their term in office; other Bishops chosen as Lords Spiritual serve for one electoral term but may also serve further terms Members may resign, and they may be expelled or suspended Pay and allowances are to be set by IPSA, with pay being related to the participation of the member in the work of the House Members will be treated for tax purposes as resident, ordinarily resident and domiciled in the UK Peers may vote in elections to either House of Parliament and they may be members of either House of Parliament The Parliament Acts will apply to the reformed House of Lords The Bill was given a second reading on 10 July 2012 by 462 votes 124, following a two-day debate. 10 This included 91 Conservative Members voting against the second reading. 11 However, the size of the Conservative rebellion on second reading, coupled with the prospect of Labour voting against the programme motion, led the Government to withdraw its 10 HC Deb 9 July 2012 cc24-132; 10 July 2012 cc188-278 11 There is statistical analysis of the rebellion in Four records down, a fifth avoided, Ballots & Bullets, 11 July 2012 5
programme motion rather than put it to the vote. Sir George Young, the Leader of the House of Commons, announced the decision not to move the programme motion at the start of the second day of the second reading debate. 12 On 6 August 2012, Nick Clegg, the Deputy Prime Minister, announced that the Government would not proceed with the House of Lords (Reform) Bill. He accused the Conservatives of breaking the coalition contract, and said that, as a result, he would ask Liberal Democrat Members to oppose boundary changes for the 2015 election. 13 On 3 September 2012 Mr Clegg made a statement in the Commons, in which he confirmed that the Bill had been withdrawn that day. 14 He made it clear that new legislation would not be introduced before the next general election. Further information on the background to the Bill, the Bill and the decision not to proceed with it can be found in the Library Research Paper House of Lords Reform Bill 2012-13 (RP 12/37); and in the Library Standard Note House of Lords Reform Bill 2012-13: decision not to proceed (SN/PC/6405). 3 House of Lords Reform Act 2014 The House of Lords Reform (No. 2) Bill 2013-14 was a private Members bill. It received Royal Assent on 14 May 2014, as the House of Lords Reform Act 2014. It was introduced in the Commons by Dan Byles, and in the Lords by Lord Steel of Aikwood. The Act allows members of the House of Lords to resign (or retire) permanently. It also provides that members who did not attend and those convicted of serious offences should cease to be members of the House of Lords. The House of Lords Reform Act 2014: - allows a member of the House of Lords to resign; - provides that a member who does not attend the House in one session ceases to be a member at the beginning of the following session. The Act makes exceptions for peers on leave of absence, disqualified or suspended, and in certain other circumstances; and - provides that a member sentenced to more than a year in prison ceases to be a member of the House. If convicted outside the UK, the House has to resolve to disqualify the member. The Act provides that the departing member may not return to the House. Further information on the background to the Bill, the Bill and its progress can be found in the Library Standard Note House of Lords Reform (No 2) Bill 2013-14 (SN/PC/6832). 3.1 The Government s changing view on minimal reform Until the second reading debate on the House of Lords Reform (No 2) Bill, in October 2013, the Government regularly said that it did not want to see small changes to the Lords but, during the debate, it announced that it would support the Bill. 12 HC Deb 10 July 2012 c188 13 Statement by Deputy Prime Minister Nick Clegg, reproduced on BBC News website, 6 August 2012 14 HC Deb 3 September 2012 c35 6
Previously, on 16 October 2012, Chloe Smith, then Parliamentary Secretary, Cabinet Office told the House of Commons that the provisions of the House of Lords (Cessation of Membership) Bill [HL] do not address the issues that make reform of the House of Lords necessary and that: Minimal alternatives such as those set out in the noble Lord s Bill are, in the Government s view, no alternatives at all. The Government have been clear that any changes must include the introduction of elected Members to the House of Lords. 15 In February 2013, the Lords were told that the Government have no further plans for legislation to reform this House in this Parliament. 16 In June 2013, the Deputy Prime Minister said that I see no need for a stand-alone Bill on House of Lords reform. 17 However, by 9 July 2013, the position was slightly different. Nick Clegg informed the House that: The Government has no further plans for major reforms of the House of Lords in this Parliament. However, recent events have shown that there is still work to do to clean up our political system and restore public confidence. That spans both Houses of Parliament. So as part of developing other reforms, like our proposals for recall of MPs, if there are 'housekeeping' changes for the Lords that require legislation we are willing to look seriously at the case for a package covering both Houses. 18 Then during the second reading debate on the House of Lords Reform (No 2) Bill, on 18 October 2013, the Minister of State, Cabinet Office, Greg Clark, told the House that the Bill contains modest proposals that the Government are prepared to support. 19 In November 2013, the Leader of the House of Lords, Lord Hill of Oareford, confirmed this in the House of Lords, saying that the Government s position has moved to one of support for the Private Member s Bill sponsored by Dan Byles. 20 4 Political and Constitutional Reform Committee report House of Lords reform: what next? On 17 October 2013, the Political and Constitutional Reform Committee s report House of Lords reform: what next? was published. 21 In its summary, the Committee said that it had focused on the desirability, practicality and effectiveness of a range of small-scale reforms to reduce the size of the House of Lords and considers which, if any, of these measures, would be likely to command a consensus. The Committee found that there was a clear consensus in favour of introducing legislation to expel members of the House of Lords who had been convicted of a serious offence; and that there was widespread support for no longer replacing hereditary peers in the House of Lords 15 HC Deb 16 October 2012 c143 16 HL Deb 6 February 2013 c259 17 HC Deb 4 June 2013 c1366 18 HC Deb 9 July 2013 c196w 19 HC Deb 18 October 2013 c1011 20 HL Deb 19 November 2013 c850, see also HC Deb 7 January 2014 cc153-154 21 Political and Constitutional Reform Committee, House of Lords reform: what next?, 17 October 2013, HC 251 2013-14 7
when they die and for tackling the issue of persistent non-attendance. The Committee also concluded that there should not be a long-term moratorium on new peers nor should a compulsory retirement age be introduced. 22 The Government s response to the Committee was published on 17 February 2014. 23 The Government welcomed the Committee s report and said that it now supports those recommendations that are in line with the provisions contained within the House of Lords Reform (No 2) Bill. The Government also told the Committee that it was committed to a mainly elected upper chamber and it is in that context that wider and substantive reform should be pursued. 24 The Government said that it supported proposals to remove persistent non-attenders; to allow peers to resign; and to expel peers convicted of a serious offence, in line with the provisions of the House of Lords Reform (No 2) Bill 2013-14. The Government commented on the other proposals considered by the Political and Constitutional Reform Committee. 5 House of Lords (Expulsion and Suspension) Bill [HL] 2014-15 The House of Lords (Expulsion and Suspension) Bill [HL] 2014-15 is a private Member s bill that was introduced in the House of Lords by Baroness Hayman (the former Lord Speaker). In outlining the Bill at Second Reading, Baroness Hayman explained its objectives: I have brought the Bill before the House because I believe that by enacting its provisions we could complete the series of reforms that have been made to the House s conduct, investigative and disciplinary systems since the events of 2008-09, and fill two important lacunae in the sanctions available to your Lordships House. [ ] My Bill would empower the House to make Standing Orders to enable a suspension to be imposed that would run beyond the end of a Parliament and during that time the right to receive a Writ of Summons would be suspended. The House would also be given the power to enact in Standing Orders the ability to expel a Member in circumstances other than the narrow ones set out in the House of Lords Reform Act 2014 non-attendance or being subject to a prison sentence of more than a year. 25 She (and a number of others) pointed to the fact that a suspension agreed early in a Parliament could be much longer than one agreed towards the end of the same Parliament. She hoped the powers would simply lie unused. She also commented that the Bill was enabling, not prescriptive. It would allow the House of Lords to determine its own procedures in its Standing Orders. 26 22 Political and Constitutional Reform Committee, House of Lords reform: what next?, 17 October 2013, HC 251 2013-14, Summary 23 Political and Constitutional Reform Committee, House of Lords reform: what next? Government s Response to the Committee s Ninth Report of 2013-14, 17 February 2014, HC 1079 2013-14 24 Political and Constitutional Reform Committee, House of Lords reform: what next? Government s Response to the Committee s Ninth Report of 2013-14, 17 February 2014, HC 1079 2013-14, para 4 25 HL Deb 24 October 2014 cc924-926 26 HL Deb 24 October 2014 c926 8
The Bill was introduced on 5 June 2014; 27 received a second reading on 24 October 2014; 28 was considered and amended in Committee on 21 November 2014; 29 was further amended at report stage on 12 December 2014; 30 and received a third reading on 7 January 2015. 31 The Bill as introduced [HL Bill 007 2014-15] was amended at Committee stage and reprinted [HL Bill 61 2014-15]. It was further amended at Report stage and again reprinted [HL Bill 71 2014-15]. The Bill was introduced in the House of Commons on 8 January 2015 [as Bill 151], and is scheduled for a second reading on 23 January 2015. 32 Sir George Young is the Member in charge of the Bill in the House of Commons. 6 Issues raised in the House of Lords Recent debates and questions in the House of Lords relating to Lords reform have concentrated on the size of the House. In January 2011, a Group appointed by the Leader of the House of Lords published a report entitled Members Leaving the House. 33 This led to an informal retirement scheme. In March 2014, a working group of Labour peers report on how the House could be reformed was published. 34 The report was debated in the House of Lords on 19 June 2014. 35 On 12 December 2013, the House of Lords held a debate on a motion to take note of the case for reducing the size of the House of Lords. 36 On 6 January 2015, the House held a debate on a motion to take note of the case for effecting a reduction in the number of Peers attending the House each day without recourse to primary legislation. 37 6.1 Retirements from the House of Lords In evidence to the Political and Constitutional Reform Committee in June 2013, David Beamish, the Clerk of Parliaments, reported that three members had taken retirement under the informal scheme that followed the report by the Leader s Group. 38 Since the introduction the retirement scheme in the House of Lords Reform Act 2014, which came into force in August 2014, five members of the House of Lords have retired under the statutory scheme. 39 27 HL Deb 5 June 2014 c22 28 HL Deb 24 October 2014 cc924-940 29 HL Deb 21 November 2014 cc644-651 30 HL Deb 12 December 2014 cc2092-2096 31 HL Deb 7 January 2015 c351 32 HC, Votes and Proceedings, 8 January 2015, Item 7 33 Leader s Group on Members Leaving the House, Members Leaving the House, 13 January 2011, HL Paper 83 2010 11 34 Labour Lords, A programme for progress, 28 March 2014 35 HL Deb 19 June 2014 cc924ff 36 HL Deb 12 December 2013 cc972ff 37 HL Deb 6 January 2015 cc270ff 38 Memorandum submitted by David Beamish, Clerk of the Parliaments, to the House of Commons Political and Constitutional Reform Select Committee, June 2013, para 11 39 See Parliament.uk, Retired Lords; in addition to the Members listed there, Lord Jenkin of Roding s retirement was announced on 6 January 2015 [HL Deb 6 January 2015 c243] 9
On 5 January 2015, Lord Sewel, the chairman of Committees, informed the House of Lords that There are 128 Conservative Peers, 122 Labour Peers, 45 Liberal Democrat Peers, 101 Crossbench Peers and 19 other Peers over 70 years of age. 40 6.2 Size of the House of Lords As at 16 December 2014, there were 791 Members eligible to sit in the House of Lords (the actual membership ). This included 679 Life Peers, 86 excepted hereditary Peers and 26 Bishops. There were also 56 Members ineligible to sit, taking the overall potential size of the membership (the absolute membership ) to 847. Ineligible Members include those disqualified from sitting due to holding a specified office (eg certain judicial positions and Members of the European Parliament, as detailed above) and those on leave of absence. In December 2014, there were eight Members disqualified from sitting due to holding a particular office and 47 members on leave of absence. (For further information on the number of members of the House of Lords, see the Lords Library Note Size of the House of Lords (LLN 2014/045).) The average daily attendance of the House of Lords in the 2013 14 session was 497. 41 The Lords Library Note reported average daily attendance in each session since 1992-93, as follows: Session Average daily attendance Session Average daily attendance 1992-93 379 2003-04 368 1993-94 378 2004-05 388 1994-95 376 2005-06 403 1995-96 372 2006-07 415 1996-97 381 2007-08 413 1997-98 417 2008-09 400 1998-99 446 2009-10 388 1999-2000 352 2010-12 468 2000-01 347 2012-13 484 2001-02 370 2013-14 497 2002-03 362 Source: Lords Library Note Size of the House of Lords (LLN 2014/045), Appendix, Table 1 On 5 January 2015, the average daily attendance in the current session 2014-15 was reported to be 479. 42 40 PQ HL3818 [on Peers], 5 January 2015 41 House of Lords, Sessional Statistics on Business and Membership 2013 14, 2014 42 PQ HL3818 [on Peers], 5 January 2015 10