header-logo header-logo

Calling time on hereditary peers? (Pt 4)

31 January 2025 / Neil Parpworth
Issue: 8102 / Categories: Features , Constitutional law
printer mail-detail
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

Quinn Emanuel Urquhart & Sullivan—Andrew Savage

Quinn Emanuel Urquhart & Sullivan—Andrew Savage

Firm expands London disputes practice with senior partner hire

Druces—Lisa Cardy

Druces—Lisa Cardy

Senior associate promotion strengthens real estate offering

Charles Russell Speechlys—Robert Lundie Smith

Charles Russell Speechlys—Robert Lundie Smith

Leading patent litigator joins intellectual property team

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