header-logo header-logo

13 December 2007 / Mark Ryan
Issue: 7301 / Categories: Features , Constitutional law
printer mail-detail

Bringing the house down

Mark Ryan explores the progress made thus far in the fiercely contested process of House of Lords reform

The House of Lords gave a first reading to the House of Lords Bill 2007 (HL Bill 3) on 7 November 2007. This private member’s Bill was introduced by Lord Steel and is similar to the House of Lords Bill he put before the house earlier this year. Although this first Bill was also in Lord Steel’s name (hence the sobriquet “the Steel Bill”), it was the result of an all-party group of both houses—the Campaign for an Effective Second Chamber—concerned to secure immediate and effective reform of the upper house.

The first Bill enjoyed a general welcome from their lordships as it received a second reading in July 2007. The second incarnation of the Bill (in an amended form) was introduced when the 2007–08 Parliamentary session opened.

The House of Lords Bill arguably represents the most significant development in terms of House of Lords reform since March 2007, when both Parliamentary houses voted on

If you are not a subscriber, subscribe now to read this content
If you are already a subscriber sign in
...or Register for two weeks' free access to subscriber content

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Thackray Williams—Lucy Zhu

Thackray Williams—Lucy Zhu

Dual-qualified partner joins as head of commercial property department

Morgan Lewis—David A. McManus

Morgan Lewis—David A. McManus

Firm announces appointment of next chair

Burges Salmon—Rebecca Wilsker

Burges Salmon—Rebecca Wilsker

Director joins corporate team from the US

NEWS
What safeguards apply when trust corporations are appointed as deputy by the Court of Protection? 
Disputing parties are expected to take part in alternative dispute resolution (ADR), where this is suitable for their case. At what point, however, does refusing to participate cross the threshold of ‘unreasonable’ and attract adverse costs consequences?
When it comes to free legal advice, demand massively outweighs supply. 'Millions of people are excluded from access to justice as they don’t have anywhere to turn for free advice—or don’t know that they can ask for help,' Bhavini Bhatt, development director at the Access to Justice Foundation, writes in this week's NLJ
When an ex-couple is deciding who gets what in the divorce or civil partnership dissolution, when is it appropriate for a third party to intervene? David Burrows, NLJ columnist and solicitor advocate, considers this thorny issue in this week’s NLJ
NLJ's latest Charities Appeals Supplement has been published in this week’s issue
back-to-top-scroll