Explain the limitations on the powers of the House of Lords.

Immediately after the Second World War, the Labour government of Clement Attlee decided to amend the 1911 Act to reduce further the power of the Lords, as a result of their fears that their radical programme of nationalisation would be delayed by the Lords and hence would not be completed within the life of the parliament. The Parliament Act of 1949 followed this up and reduced the length of time the House of Lords could delay bills, limiting its ability to check the power of government.  Lords have the power to delay other bills for a maximum of one year, after which Commons can invoke the Parliament Act 1949 and simply override the Lords – in other words, dominate them. For example, the Labour government invoked the rarely used Parliament Act to override the Lords and lower the gay age of consent to sixteen.

There is also the Salisbury Doctrine, which means the Lords can’t override a manifesto issue. The Salisbury Doctrine, or "Convention" as it is sometimes called, emerged from the working arrangements reached during the Labour Government of 1945-51, when the fifth Marquess of Salisbury was the Leader of the Conservative Opposition in the Lords. The Convention ensures that major Government Bills can get through the Lords when the Government of the day has no majority in the Lords. In practice, it means that the Lords does not try to vote down at second or third reading, a Government Bill mentioned in an election manifesto.

Most Lords’ amendments of government bills are actually suggested by the government, and critics, therefore, accuse the government of manipulating and misusing the Lords’ time to improve on poorly drafted Bills. Furthermore, the Lords have the ability to create Private Peers’ Bills, although these are rejected most of the time. For example, the Assisted Dying Bill (introduced by Lord Falconer of Thoroton) was overwhelmingly rejected by MPs.

There is also the argument that it is unrepresentative of the general population and are not democratically legitimate. Socially the House of Lords still represents the educated, wealthy and privileged. Although this produces effective statesmen it does not represent the population as a whole. The working class is under represented. Many peers do not turn up for debates or only turn up to collect their hefty expenses cheque. Also, the fact that there remain 26 Anglican clergy suggests that the system is not representative of multi-cultural and multi faith Britain.

To conclude, although the House of Lords has its uses, there are many limitations on its power. It remains an ancient, but controversially unelected, second house which appears, to many, to be out of date with modern Britain and a throw back to history.  The slow evolution of British democracy over time has left it transformed and with a limited range of real powers.