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

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

Extracts from this document...

Introduction

Evaluate the arguments for and against a directly elected House of Lords The Parliament in the UK consists of the House of Commons and House of Lords. The House of Commons obtains legitimation as the members are directly elected. House of Lords however have barely any members who are directly elected. There is controversy over whether to have the whole of the House of Lords directly elected or to keep to the majority staying indirectly elected. Many are for a reform in the House of Lords so that they are directly elected. Tony Blair, the current PM staged a reform in November 1999 to get rid of hereditary peers in the House of Lords. These are people who have a healthy interest in politics and get into the House of Lords as they had family in there. ...read more.

Middle

Tony Blair believed in keeping appointed members but giving them no real decision-making authority in politics. Charters 88 are a pressure group who believes there is a better way to run this country no matter which government is in power. They strongly believe that House of Lords should be reformed. They campaign for House of Lords to be 100% directly elected and should have powers similar to the House of Commons. So Charter 88 has similar views to Billy Bragg but believe powers of both houses should be similar. So we can see there are strong arguments for a directly elected House of Lords. However, there are many arguments that are against a directly elected House of Lords. The members of the House of Lords who are independent, not attached to a party, are highly valued by the public as their views can be similar to a ...read more.

Conclusion

This will cause big competition within the department as all those within the department would be legitimised by the fact they were elected by the electorate. So we can see that there are strong arguments for and against a directly elected House of Lords. I believe a directly elected House of Lords would be good as it has legitimation so their actions would be something of the action of the people. This would mean the idea of democracy is intact. However, by directly electing members of the House of Lords there is a danger that they would abuse the fact they have legitimation for their actions and would make decisions to benefit themselves rather than benefit everyone else. Also it could potentially create anarchy within departments as all members are legitimised. So I do believe that we should not have a fully directly elected House of Lords. Manish Kerai ...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. Government & Politics Revision Notes

    won a constituency vote in the 1997 election and he lost his attempt to win another independent seat in 2001 using FPTP. * PR is likely to remove 'safe' seats with their characteristics of low turn-outs. If each vote counts, people will feel more inclined to involve themselves in elections.

  2. What is the main reason for the loss of faith and interest in our ...

    For example it is almost impossible to conclude anything from the answers to question 6, as only 6 people out of the 40 surveyed were eligible to answer it. Using more people would be a solution to this problem; however that would also have been remedied by using the internet

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

    This can be linked to low attendances of the House of Lords which has remained inconsistent after the life peerages act in 1958. However, on the other hand, the Lords could have been seen as a good second chamber who would complement the work of the lords.

  2. Draft a memorandum to the government evaluating the merits and demerits of differing reform ...

    little outside experience or understanding of the problems faced by ordinary citizens and because they are too constrained by party discipline. This could be replicated if the members of the House of Lords directly elected as proportional representation on a list system would in fact mean greater constraints and of

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

    Finance Bills were traditionally not vetoed by the House of Lords, amended maybe but never rejected. The Conservatives called it the beginnings of socialism, it would affect all those who would traditionally vote for the Conservatives (the land owners and the wealthy)

  2. Critically evaluate the laws and conventions that regulate and control the relationship between the ...

    Salisbury convention Lord Salisbury, a Conservative who sat in the Lords till his death, developed a doctrine of the mandate over this period which argued that the will of the people and the views expressed by the House of

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