Excellent article: Revision Update: Parliament: House of Lords

Revision Update: Parliament: House of Lords:

'via Blog this'

How effective is the Lords at constraining the executive and what arethe implications of this for the reform debate?

http://www.bbc.co.uk/democracylive/house-of-commons-22266173


This week the Commons and the Lords have been ping-ponging legislation which would mean that workers could give up employment rights and protections in return for shares in the company they work for. This was a government Bill backed by the Chancellor of E, George Osbourne.

The Lords forced a couple of minor changes but despite many peers' lingering concerns over the very principle of the bill, many of them voted to pass the bulk of the proposals. One of the peers later said that he did not like the bill but did not try to slow it down any further as he wasn't elected and didn't feel he had the right to obstruct the wishes of the democratically elected Commons.

This is an often quoted position for some peers in the Lords and it has some implications:
1. It means that the Lords occasionally holds itself back and thus allows the executive dominated Commons (built in majority) to dominate (rightly or wrongly).
2. It suggests that an elected Lords might be more psychologically assertive in standing up to the Commons/executive and that. Some would argue that this would improve democracy by reducing the power of an over-mighty executive that can trample over parliament whilst others might point to the increased possibility of legislative gridlock with an second chamber embolden by democratic legitimacy.

The issue over Lords reform may be over for the next couple of years but if their is a hung parliament in 2015 the LDs will probably try to use their position in a coalition to push Lords reform to the top of the agenda once again.

2012: Coalition drops House of Lords

from the BBC website:

Why has the government dropped the plans?

The government was facing considerable opposition, particularly among Conservative MPs. In July 2012, 91 Tory MPs rebelled against the government in a vote on how to timetable the House of Lords Reform Bill - the largest such act of defiance since the coalition was formed in 2010. Following this the prime minister told his backbenchers he would have "one more try" on Lords reform but if his party could not reach a deal he would "draw a line" under the issue. Several senior Labour politicians also raised doubts and many peers were reported to be unhappy, too.

What does it mean for the coalition?

Lords reform has been a key goal for the Lib Dems, and its failure raises coalition tensions. Nick Clegg said the coalition agreement was a contract between the coalition partners and the Conservatives had broken the contract by not honouring the commitment to Lords reform.

What will the Lib Dems do now?

Mr Clegg says his party will withdraw its support for boundary changes designed to cut the number of MPs from 650 to 600 and equalise the size of constituencies- a Conservative manifesto pledge. Legislation to reduce the House of Commons has already been passed but proposals for the new constituency boundaries will have to be approved by MPs before changes can be made.

Several Conservative MPs have criticised the move saying the coalition agreement links the Conservative commitment to bring in boundary changes to the Alternative Vote referendum - something the Lib Dems wanted - which was held last year. The MPs say they have kept their part of the deal and Mr Clegg cannot now backtrack on boundary changes.

When will the boundary vote take place?

The final proposals for the new constituency boundaries are not due to come back to Parliament until October 2013. The Lib Dem leader has said he would like to see an amendment to delay the change before then, but Mr Cameron is expected to go ahead with the vote as planned.

Cambridge University 10min Lords Reform from July 2012

House of Lords Reform - YouTube: ""

'via Blog this'

Reforming the Lords Newsnight 2011

House of Lords & Coalition Tensions August 2012

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nCO7FWx0Jak

V GOOD 10 MINUTE EXAMINATION OF PMQs - LISTEN TO THIS!!!! NOT SURE HOW LONG THE BBC WILL KEEP THIS ONLINE

Lords reform case against

If passed, this Lords reform bill would be a catastrophe | Jesse Norman http://gu.com/p/38yhe

Constitutional reform in the era of the Coalition

http://www.politicalinsightmagazine.com/?p=937

Detailed reports on Lords reform 1999-2010

Chronology:
http://www.parliament.uk/documents/lords-information-office/House%20of%20Lords%20Reform%201997-2010%20-%2028%20%20June%202010.pdf

 Implications: Click HERE
1 Introduction .................................................................................................................... 1
2 Conflict Between Two Elected Houses? ........................................................................ 3
3 An Elected Second House—Wither the Salisbury Convention? .................................... 7
4 Duplicating the House of Commons—A Loss of Expertise? ........................................ 12
5 Duplicating the House of Commons—A Loss of Independence? ................................ 16
6 A More Representative House of Lords? ..................................................................... 19
7 Religious Representation in the House of Lords .......................................................... 21
8 The Church of England and Lords Reform—Disestablishment? ................................. 25
9 Little House, Big House? .............................................................................................. 28
10 Relationship with Citizens and Voters ........................................................................ 30
11 The House of Lords and Wider Constitutional Reform ............................................... 34

Lords Reform update June 2012

The Telegraph lays into Labour but also Tories and LDs over House of Lords, saying that the current proposals and debates is more about party political posturing than getting reform right. See here.

Miliband calls for referendum on Lords reform.

House of Lords reform: riven coalition prepares for testing bill http://gu.com/p/38h5v

How effective is Parliament? Rebellions, backbenchers and the Coalition

Parliament has often been characterised as being slaves to government. One theory is that MPs can be cajoled into votingin line with whatever their party leadership wants though loyalty, ideology, desire for promotion and the whipsystem. However, the coalition has seen a rise in the numer of 'rebellions' (where MPs vote against their party leadership). Rebellions don't have to succeed but just the existence of MPs voting against their party line suggests an assertiveness often absent in the era of Thatcher and Blair.

Why?
Coalition ideological differences - the more extreme wings of the coalition parties (right of the Tories, left of the LDs) were always likely to be unhappy with particular bits of coalition policy which cannot keep everyone happy.

That said, it should be remembered that the coalition does have a substantial majority. If the coalition government is weak then it is not because of lack of seats, just internal arguments.


The Bumper Book of Coalition Rebellions | Ballots & Bullets:

Full book here, but 20 key points here:

We’ve been producing end-of-session reports detailing the rebellions of government backbenchers for several years now – but we’ve never had to produce one quite so large before.  The Bumper Book of Coalition Rebellions is available free of charge in pdf format (at the end of this post). It details every rebellion and every rebel. How much more fun could you want on a miserable Tuesday morning? But in case you don’t have the time, or the inclination, to look at more than 100 pages of info, here’s 20 key points about the behaviour of Coalition MPs in the last session.

1.      The last session saw 239 rebellions by Coalition MPs.  This is higher than the number of rebellions by government MPs in any other session in the post-war era.  Indeed, a figure of 239 is higher than in all but three entire post-war parliaments.  And there were more rebellions in the 2010-12 session than in the period from 1945-1966 combined, taking in 21 years, six parliaments and six Prime Ministers.

2.       In relative terms, measured as a percentage of the divisions in the session, there were rebellions by coalition MPs in 44% of divisions – also without precedent in the post-war era. By party, Conservative MPs broke ranks in 28% of votes, Lib Dems MPs have done so in 24%.

3.       Even these separate figures are very high by comparison with historic behaviour of government backbenchers.  The Conservative figure is higher than the rate of rebellion by government MPs in all but eight post-war sessions.  The Lib Dem rate of 24% is higher than that seen by government MPs in all but eleven post-war sessions.

4.       And compared with behaviour in other first sessions, the differences with this session are even more obvious, especially when compared to the first sessions of parliaments following a change in government.  Between 1945 and 1997, the six sessions immediately after a change in government saw rates of rebellion between zero (1964) and 6% (1979).  The current rate of rebellion is therefore more than seven times what had until now been the post-war peak for a first session after a change of government.

5.       A total of 153 Coalition MPs have voted against their whip thus far.  Most (119) of these are Conservatives, but this is not surprising, given that there have been more Conservative rebellions and there are anyway more Conservative MPs.

6.       Eight out of the top ten Coalition rebels are Conservatives.  The most rebellious Liberal Democrat MP is Mike Hancock, whose 44 rebellious votes place him sixth. Andrew George is the only other Lib Dem MP in the top ten.

7.       As a percentage of the total number of votes, the rates of rebellion of the most rebellious MPs are very high in relative terms: Philip Hollobone has been rebelling at a rate of roughly one rebellion in every five votes.  This is a much higher rate than, say, Jeremy Corbyn or Dennis Skinner, during the Blair or Brown premierships, and represents a serious fracture from the party leadership.

8.       What will especially concern the government whips is the behaviour of their newer MPs.  Of the 119 Conservative rebels, 71 (or six in ten) are from the new intake, and between them the newbie Tory rebels have cast a whopping 401 rebellious votes.

9.       Whilst numerically smaller, rebellion is much more widespread amongst the Lib Dems.  Whereas nearly one in four (39%) of Conservative MPs have rebelled, a total of 34 Lib Dems, or 60% of the parliamentary party, have now done so.

10.   The largest rebellion came in October 2011, over a motion calling for a referendum on Britain’s membership of the EU.  A total of 82 Coalition MPs (81 of them Conservatives) defied a three-line whip to vote for the motion, another 14-19 abstaining.   It was not the largest backbench revolt since 1945, but it was one of the largest, topped on the Conservative side only a handful of revolts over gun control at the fag-end of the Major government.  It was also the largest rebellion on the issue of Europe of the post-war era.

11.   The largest Lib Dem rebellion came in December 2010 over the issue of university tuition fees. Twenty-one Liberal Democrat MPs voted against their whips, a further five Lib Dem MPs abstaining. It was the largest Liberal Democrat rebellion since the formation of the merged party in 1988-89 and as a proportion of the parliamentary party constituted a larger rebellion than did the Conservative rebellion over the European referendum.

12.   Yet although the frequency of rebellions is alarmingly high, the average rebellion is small, comprising just seven MPs. (The average Conservative rebellion is eight MPs, the average Liberal Democrat revolt is even lower at just three MPs).  This is one of the reasons why the government’s majority has not yet been seriously threatened as a result of a rebellion.

13.   The other reason is that these two groups of rebels rarely coalesce.  Almost half of rebellions (46%) have seen Conservative MPs rebel alone; just over a third (36%) have seen Lib Dem MPs rebel alone, and less than one in five (18%) have seen a rebellion by both Lib Dem and Conservative MPs.

14.   This is because the two groups generally rebel on very different issues.  Just over seven in ten (71%) of Lib Dem rebellions have been on social policy (broadly defined).  But nearly half (49%) of Conservative rebellions are on constitutional policy (broadly defined). Of this last category, a big chunk (nearly one in five of all Conservative rebellions) has been on Europe (18%), rebellions which are more than double the average size of all Conservative rebellions.

15.   The size of the Government’s majority is often not appreciated.  Even its formal majority of 76 is substantial.

16.   In reality, because of divisions in which Labour vote with the government or abstain, the average majority in practice has been an even larger 123.   In the majority of votes (411), Labour oppose the government, and when they do the government’s average majority has been 86.  But when Labour abstain (50 votes), the majority averages 268; and when Labour support the government (30 votes), the average majority rises to 392.

17.   There are plenty of issues on which 39 Conservative MPs might rebel, but there are fewer on which the Labour party would be willing to join them.  Overall, 21% of coalition rebellions occurred when Labour was not voting against the government – and when there was therefore no chance of a defeat.  But that figures rises to 31% of Conservative rebellions.

18.   The hurdles in overturning a large in-built Coalition majority are even more acute for the Liberal Democrats.  Lib Dem rebellions were more likely to take place when Labour was opposing the government, but because their backbench MPs number only 35, even if all of them vote against the Government with all the Opposition MPs, that would still not be enough to defeat the Government.

19.   Parliamentary ambushes (like the one that caused the Coalition’s only defeat in December 2011) aside, for the Government’s majority to fall much below 50, both Conservative and Liberal Democrats need to rebel in decent numbers, with the support of the Labour frontbench and the minor parties. This has happened rarely since May 2010, and the Government’s majority has only fallen below 50 on only 22 occasions in its first 24 months in power.

20.   But the Coalition’s two wobbly wings will require careful handling – with plenty of issues in the immediate future that will ensure continued high levels of Coalition dissent.

How good are backbench MPs at fulfilling their function? Is this 'the most revolting parliament in history'?

Two excellent articles (May 2012) on rebel MPs and factors that have led to the coaltion suffering rebellions in around 40% of its proposed legislation (not necessarily successful rebellions, mind you). If we have a more assertive House of Commons, does that mean there is less reason for reforming the system?
http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/2012/may/28/most-revolting-parliament-history http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/2012/may/28/top-six-rebel-mps

Does the Lords need to be made stronger?

One argument in favour of an elected Lords is that it would have greater legitimacy to stand up to an increasingly powerful executive. Some argue that the Lords already does stand up to governments and cite the rejection of Brown's plan to bring in 42 day detention as evidence of the lack of need for reform on the grounds of weakness of the Lords.

However, in truth, the Lords remains weak. Brown could have pushed 42 day detention through using the Parliament Act but decided not to, probably on the grounds that it would bring him too much criticism. So the Lords had influence over a PM who was not interested in attracting criticism.

The Lords has faired less well in blocking many of the Coalition's reforms. The Lords had voted against many of the coalition's welfare reforms (such as the £26,000 benefits cap). However, the Coalition are a lot more willing to take criticism than Brown was over 42 day detention.  The Commons just simply voted to overturn the Lord's amendments, using a technicality known as "financial privelage". They didn't even have to use the Parliament Act. So the Lords can do very little when faced with an assertive government with enough seats in the Commons to push through a law. The Welfare Reform bill became law in March 2012.

Whether or not you think this means the Lords should be reformed to make it stronger depends on one's point of view.

House of Lords reform update May 2012

Bagehot: House repairs | The Economist:

'via Blog this'

Select Committees Source from Jan 2012 Paper

Select Committees

There is a House of Commons select committee for each government department, examining
three aspects: spending, policies and administration. These departmental select committees
have a minimum of 11 members, who decide upon a line of inquiry and then gather written
and oral evidence. Findings are reported to the Commons, printed, and published on the
Parliament website. The government then usually has 60 days to reply to the committee’s
recommendations.

Following the adoption by the House of Commons of recommendations from the Reform of
the House of Commons Committee:

• Departmental select committee chairs are elected by their fellow MPs

• A backbench business committee has been established with the ability to schedule business in the Commons chamber and in Westminster Hall on days, or parts of days, set aside for non-government business.

Legislative committees
Both Houses of Parliament refer legislation to committees for detailed discussion and
approval. These committees are part of the process of making laws. They scrutinise proposed
laws and may consider amendments to improve the legislation. Amendments approved in
legislative committees must be approved by the whole House.

Source: adapted from www.parliament.gov.uk, October, 2010.

Recall of Elected Representatives Bill 2010-12 — UK Parliament

Recall of Elected Representatives Bill 2010-12 — UK Parliament:

'via Blog this'

BBC News - Recall plan for MPs 'deeply flawed'

BBC News - Recall plan for MPs 'deeply flawed':

'via Blog this'

BBC News - 'Laziness' not grounds for MP recall, says Nick Clegg

BBC News - 'Laziness' not grounds for MP recall, says Nick Clegg:

'via Blog this'