header-logo header-logo

Calling time on hereditary peers?

11 October 2024 / Neil Parpworth
Issue: 8089 / Categories: Features , Constitutional law , Public
printer mail-detail
192564
The Labour government intends to finally see off the ‘rump’ of Lords who inherited their title. Neil Parpworth analyses the proposed reform
  • Potentially ending a process that has lasted a quarter of a century, the House of Lords (Hereditary Peers) Bill aims to break the link between the second chamber and hereditary peerage.
  • This article examines the Bill, the views of its champions and detractors, and its likely timeline. It also considers other changes the government may try to implement in the House of Lords.

On 5 September 2024, the recently elected Labour government introduced a Bill in Parliament consisting of a mere five clauses. Despite its brevity, the House of Lords (Hereditary Peers) Bill is of constitutional importance in that it strives to bring to an end a process which began 25 years ago, when the House of Lords Act 1999 (HLA 1999) first tackled the issue of hereditary peers acting as legislators. While that Act reflected a compromise in the form of a rump of 92 peers being allowed

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

Pillsbury—Lord Garnier KC

Pillsbury—Lord Garnier KC

Appointment of former Solicitor General bolsters corporate investigations and white collar practice

Hall & Wilcox—Nigel Clark

Hall & Wilcox—Nigel Clark

Firm strengthens international strategy with hire of global relations consultant

Slater Heelis—Sylviane Kokouendo & Shazia Ashraf

Slater Heelis—Sylviane Kokouendo & Shazia Ashraf

Partner and associate join employment practice

NEWS
The government’s plan to introduce a Single Professional Services Supervisor could erode vital legal-sector expertise, warns Mark Evans, president of the Law Society of England and Wales, in NLJ this week
Writing in NLJ this week, Jonathan Fisher KC of Red Lion Chambers argues that the ‘failure to prevent’ model of corporate criminal responsibility—covering bribery, tax evasion, and fraud—should be embraced, not resisted
Professor Graham Zellick KC argues in NLJ this week that, despite Buckingham Palace’s statement stripping Andrew Mountbatten Windsor of his styles, titles and honours, he remains legally a duke
Writing in NLJ this week, Sophie Ashcroft and Miranda Joseph of Stevens & Bolton dissect the Privy Council’s landmark ruling in Jardine Strategic Ltd v Oasis Investments II Master Fund Ltd (No 2), which abolishes the long-standing 'shareholder rule'
In NLJ this week, Sailesh Mehta and Theo Burges of Red Lion Chambers examine the government’s first-ever 'Afghan leak' super-injunction—used to block reporting of data exposing Afghans who aided UK forces and over 100 British officials. Unlike celebrity privacy cases, this injunction centred on national security. Its use, the authors argue, signals the rise of a vast new body of national security law spanning civil, criminal, and media domains
back-to-top-scroll