• Join over 1.2 million students every month
  • Accelerate your learning by 29%
  • Unlimited access from just £6.99 per month

Assess the arguments in favour of a largely or wholly elected second chamber.

Extracts from this document...


Transfer-Encoding: chunked ´╗┐Assess the arguments in favour of a largely or wholly elected second chamber. The House of Lords (HL), sometimes known as the revising chamber or upper chamber of parliament, is the second element of parliament and as such its consent (generally) is required to make law. There are two types of peer, Lord spiritual (the 26 most senior Church of England bishop, which now has 2 women in is ranks) and the Lord Temporal (of which there are three types; hereditary peers, life peers and law Lords). Before the passing of the Parliament Act in 1911 the Hl held a veto over legislation passed in the Commons. That statue means that the Lords can only delay the passing of a bill and not defeat it totally. When New Labour came into power in 1990 one of their manifesto pledges was to reform the Upper chamber by abolishing the rights of hereditary peers to come to parliament and vote on legislation. This was always going to be hard to achieve and when the House of Lords Act 1999 was granted Royal Assent, due to the Weatherall (Speaker of the HC before Bercow) Amendments, 92 hereditary remained members of the lords. Despite a couple of half-hearted attempts to further reform the Lords since the HLA (House of Lords Act) ...read more.


Electing the upper house at a different time to the Commons, such as at the same time as European elections, would also help to ensure its composition differs from that of the lower house. Members of the upper house could be elected for long, non-renewable terms meaning they would be less influenced by short-term electoral considerations and so could take a longer-term view on legislation might be possible for many members of the Commons. Furthermore, the expertise of an appointed House of Lords is often overstated for some areas of policy. One of the most frequently made arguments in favour of an elected House of Lords is that the chamber brings a wide array of expertise to bear on the legislative process While this is true for some areas of policy, particularly legal, constitutional and some scientific matters, research on peers? understanding of social policy - the largest area of public spending ? shows this to be patchy. MPs tend to have a greater knowledge of this area of policy, at least partly due to their contacts with constituents. More broadly, research facilities for members of the Lords are more limited than those in the lower house, leaving peers more likely to rely on materials from lobbyists. ...read more.


A strong. Independent appointments commission could deliver this, removing or greatly reducing the role of political parties in the nomination process In addition, an elected upper house would produce competing claims of legitimacy, foster conflict between the Commons and Lords, and bring gridlock. If both Houses of Parliament were directly elected - and by different electoral systems at different times -- disputes about who represents the will of the people could arise. The constitutional conventions governing relations between the two houses would no longer be suitable. The Salisbury convention, which states that the Lords should not reject bills that enact a manifesto commitment of the governing party, has already come under strain with peers disputing the mandate of governments. New rules of the game would have to be agreed at a time of strained relations. The House of Commons would remain the dominant chamber and it would not be obliged to accept amendments made in the upper house. But if an upper house emboldened by direct election refused to back down, the choices facing the government would be unappealing. It could compromise and find itself unable to implement its manifesto pledges. Or it could resort to the Parliament Act 1949 and enact legislation without the consent of the lords after a gap of 1 year. In short, an elected upper house would flex its muscles, producing gridlock and doing little to improve the quality of legislation. ...read more.

The above preview is unformatted text

This student written piece of work is one of many that can be found in our AS and A Level United Kingdom section.

Found what you're looking for?

  • Start learning 29% faster today
  • 150,000+ documents available
  • Just £6.99 a month

Not the one? Search for your essay title...
  • Join over 1.2 million students every month
  • Accelerate your learning by 29%
  • Unlimited access from just £6.99 per month

See related essaysSee related essays

Related AS and A Level United Kingdom essays

  1. Marked by a teacher

    "The House of Commons is a highly effective parliamentary chamber" to what extent do ...

    4 star(s)

    Scrutiny, the second, and in my opinion the most important, function of the House of Commons, involves holding the government to account for its actions. In the past it has been suggested that because the government often has such large majorities in the House of Commons, the task of scrutiny can be difficult and the results are ineffective.

  2. Marked by a teacher

    Assess the arguments in favour of the greater use of Direct Democracy in the ...

    3 star(s)

    It is true that by allowing UK citizens to take more of an active role in politics, interest may increase, and therefore so would knowledge of the subject. (Voter turnout may also increase because of this increased interest.) However, if the public are not well informed, but are given the

  1. Evaluate the arguments for and against a directly elected House of Lords

    He had his own plan in reforming the House of Lords called the "secondary mandate" system. This plan also says that House of Lords members should be directly elected but in a system he believes is less confusing. This system would mean that there is no place for appointed and hereditary peers in the House of Lords.

  2. Media or Manifesto?

    It is just as likely that the Sun were influenced by the electorate's switch. Nicholas Jones claims that, "As readers we tend to buy the newspaper which suits our political thinking". Rupert Murdoch knows this, and his switch of support to Labour may have not so much carried the electorate,

  1. House Of Lords Reform - What did the 1999 act reforming the lords ...

    There is another "con" with the idea of a partially elected lords would be that there is already the House of Commons which is elected, why have a second chamber which is elected? The Lords could start to reject more because they can argue that they are legitimate and thus can undermine the work of the lords.

  2. What Ways Did The Liberal Government Implement Social And Welfare Reforms 1906-1911 Bring About ...

    and would benefit all those who would traditionally vote for the Liberals. Much to the surprise of just about everyone, the Lords rejected the budget. In reality this meant that the government was paralysed and could do no spending and could not collect any taxes.

  1. Consider the Political Issues about the Role and Composition of a Second Chamber.

    1949 saw the Lords power to delay a bill reduced to just one year. Other changes included the Life Peerage Act of 1958, which gave the Prime Minister the power to give any person the right to sit and vote in the House of Lords in their own lifetime.

  2. Reforming the Lords - Elected Second Chamber

    Finally, a partially elected second chamber can be seen as the best of both worlds, taking the positive points from each side ? there will still be a number of people chosen for their superior knowledge in their field, while the elected members will represent the people.

  • Over 160,000 pieces
    of student written work
  • Annotated by
    experienced teachers
  • Ideas and feedback to
    improve your own work