» How to ‘refresh’ the Lords ¦ What You Can Get Away With

Via Jennie, Michael Crick on how many new peers need to be appointed to make the House of Lords representative of the votes cast at the last election.

It’s an absurd number, but then it’s part of an absurd system where people get appointed to jobs for life on the whim of the Prime Minister of the day to serve in half of the legislature of a country that’s ostensibly democratic.

One thing from it stood out for me though, from David Cameron’s interview in the House Magazine:

I think it’s important to keep refreshing the talent in the House of Lords

I can think of a system that would allow the upper house of Parliament to actually be refreshed on a regular basis. It would ensure that anyone who’s been in their for a long period could be replaced, or if they wanted to stay on, they’d have to prove that they could still do the job to a large number of independent people. The number of members of the house could be fixed, and over a period of time, the whole place could be refreshed without having to resort to the anti-democratic absurdity of needing to appoint people.

But then if he really did believe in refreshing the Lords, he wouldn’t have allowed the reforms to create a democratic Lords to disappear. Yet again, Cameron’s actions show his real priorities, not his words.

,
Trackback

2 comments untill now

  1. if they wanted to stay on, they’d have to prove that they could still do the job to a large number of independent people.

    This was not in the coalition’s abandoned proposals. Elections would have been to fifteen-year non-renewable terms.

  2. Sorry, I think I garbled my meaning in writing a quick post. I was thinking more of those Lords who’d wish to stay on in the continuing house by getting themselves elected.