header-logo header-logo

Home Login E-newsletter About us
31 January 2025 / Neil Parpworth
Issue: 8102 / Categories: Features , Constitutional law
printer mail-detail

Calling time on hereditary peers? (Pt 4)

© Copyright LexisNexis 2026. All Rights Reserved.
205946
What do the peers make of the Bill seeking to reform hereditary peerage? Neil Parpworth reports back from the House of Lords
  • The government’s House of Lords (Hereditary Peers) Bill received its second reading in the House of Lords in December last year.
  • It is of no surprise that many hereditary peers spoke against the Bill. It was criticised as a partisan measure, and framed as a breach of the undertaking given to the House by the Blair government in 1999.
  • Other issues raised included the continued presence of the Lords Spiritual, and non-participation by life peers.

As previously reported, the government’s House of Lords (Hereditary Peers) Bill has passed all of its stages in the House of Commons without amendment (see ‘Calling time on hereditary peers? Pt 1’, 174 NLJ 8089, pp9-10; ‘Pt 2’, 174 NLJ 8093, pp11-12 and ‘Pt 3’, NLJ, 10 January 2025, pp13-14). On 11 December 2024, the House of Lords gave the Bill a second reading

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

Read All
Sponsored by
London Solicitors Litigation Association—John McElroy

London Solicitors Litigation Association—John McElroy

Fieldfisher partner appointed president as LSLA marks milestone year

Kingsley Napley—Kirsty Churm & Olivia Stiles

Kingsley Napley—Kirsty Churm & Olivia Stiles

Firm promotes two lawyers to partnership across employment and family

Foot Anstey—five promotions

Foot Anstey—five promotions

Firm promotes five lawyers to partnership across key growth areas

NEWS
Read All
NLJ this week: Divorce ‘nuclear weapon’ freezes assets but entangles outsiders
Freezing orders in divorce proceedings can unexpectedly ensnare third parties and disrupt businesses. In NLJ this week, Lucy James of Trowers & Hamlins explains how these orders—dubbed a ‘nuclear weapon’—preserve assets but can extend far beyond spouses to companies and business partners 
NLJ this week: What counts as ‘rent’? Court says labour alone won’t do
A Court of Appeal ruling has clarified that ‘rent’ must be monetary—excluding tenants paid in labour from statutory protection. In this week's NLJ, James Naylor explains Garraway v Phillips, where a tenant worked two days a week instead of paying rent
Your magistrates’ court needs you!
Thousands more magistrates are to be recruited, under a major shake-up to speed up and expand the hiring process
NLJ this week: Freed but failed—justice system leaves the innocent empty-handed
Three men wrongly imprisoned for a combined 77 years have been released—yet received ‘not a penny’ in compensation, exposing deep flaws in the justice system. Writing in NLJ this week, Dr Jon Robins reports on Justin Plummer, Oliver Campbell and Peter Sullivan, whose convictions collapsed amid discredited forensics, ‘oppressive’ police interviews and unreliable ‘cell confessions’
NLJ this week: Clarity on whistleblowing, settlements and tribunal limits
A quiet month for employment cases still delivers key legal clarifications. In his latest Employment Law Brief for NLJ, Ian Smith reports that whistleblowing protection remains intact even where disclosures are partly self-serving, provided the worker reasonably believes they serve the ‘public interest’ 
Copyright © 2026 LexisNexis
back-to-top-scroll