Debate about the format and selection of our second chamber rages on, says Seamus Burns
The historic decision of the House of Commons last month to support the principle of a wholly or largely elected House of Lords can be viewed as representing an acceptance at last by the government that in the 21st century, only a democratically elected second chamber accords with the public’s notion of what constitutes a legitimate body, fit for purpose to scrutinise and revise government legislation and to act as a brake on the populist inclinations of the executive.
The two significant votes in the Commons, were respectively for an 80% elected second chamber (305 for and 267 against), and for a fully elected second chamber, an even larger majority, (337 for and 224 against), ie a majority of 113 in favour, albeit many of these MPs had perversely voted in favour of a fully appointed House of Lords too.
Second opinions
The Commons has established itself as the predominant chamber in our legislature since 1902 when Lord
.tmb-mov69x69.jpg?sfvrsn=77dbbdb7_1)
.tmb-mov69x69.jpg?sfvrsn=b3bea7f_1)
