The House of Lords is the upper house of the Parliament of the United Kingdom. Members are appointed by either the monarch or the House of Lords Appointments Commission. The House of Lords reviews laws passed by the House of Commons and can delay their passage if deemed necessary.
Narrow down the conversation to these participants:
Discussions from these authors are shown:
The house of lords should be fully elected, but it needs to be kept in order to prevent a dictatorship.
@9T3B49L7mos7MO
No, the house of lords should be reformed by abolishing hereditary and CofE peers, becoming a technocratic upper house that is still accountable to the commons
No but it should be filled with genuine experts, who can genuinely and intellectually advise and have their say. Not just people who have friends in high places.
@9Q2FG329mos9MO
A second chamber is useful, but not one accessed by birth or by doing favours for the government. It should be elected.
No but lifetime and child peerages should be removed, and there should be elected lords and maximum terms
create a forced retirement age and crack down on being able to vote on matters which personally benefit the lords
The house of lords should not be abolished but membership should be controlled. Lords should not be appointed by outgoing prime ministers.
No, but should be changed to a meritocratic chamber for those who are successful in a diverse range of fields
@9NBC3MC10mos10MO
The house of Lords should be comprised of experts and leaders within different fields and industries, and should not be an inherited position from someone's family
There should be a review of existing Lords, and some who do not meet a renewed threshold of suitability for the post should be removed. Reform rather than abolition.
A new house should be implemented instead, however, this house should be the lower house. Proposing bills to the commons, but with no voting power. This house should have elected officials from constituencies. They would need to work in separate to the fellow member in the commons.
No, it should be reformed. The existamce of a second chamber is important, however, being beholden to the election cycle would be damaging.
Yes, but each lord position should be replaced every few years by random between two pots of recommended academics/professionals and one random civilian who puts themselves forward.
@9MKTYCYLiberal Democrat11mos11MO
It should exist as a second house for checks and balances but shouldn't have an elevated status than the Commons
Hell, yes, replace it with a House of Citizens; why do we need people with inherited titles to run our lifes for us?
No, but it should be reformed to operate like an upper house similar to the US senate. Hereditary peerages should be abolished
Yes, should be replaced with a elected body with either proportional representation or Single Transferrable Vote (STV)
No, the function of the Lords as a revision mechanism is too important, but significant reform would be welcome. Removal of any heredity would be item number one.
No, but hereditary peers and bishops should be removed in favour of life peers.
No but it should remain an unelected body comprised of independently reviewed experts who must remain wholly independent in their voting
@9NQSF5710mos10MO
No, it should be fully elected instead through proportional representation with long terms of around 10 years
No, it should instead be reformed as a jury-duty ancient Greek-style upper house, with terms of 12 months with a continuation of salaries and full subsidies and/or tax breaks for companies affected by any temporary secondments.
No, but there should be strict limits to the number of political appointees and greater powers given to the HoL Appointments Commission to veto poor nominations
The House of Lords is a strange chamber which seems anachronistic but in my opinion does (potentially) offer something that an elected house doesn't. If MPs were selected and elected on the basis of their individual knowledge and skills rather than their electability and willingness to support their party's positions, I might be more in favour of an elected upper house. However, 'being a suitable and effective legislator' and 'being electable' are two different skillsets - some have both, but many have just one.
The biggest issue with the House of Lords is not… Read more
No but the selection policy should be reviewed so the house is fit for purpose as opposed to a prize to be given for dodgy favours doubtless recieved
No, but reform the system of political appointees and focus more on appointing life peers for their service/expertise outside of politics
@92RCHB73yrs3Y
it should be significantly reformed
@9D2Q5C82yrs2Y
Replace with an elected house instead
No; there should be an appointed second chamber with certain powers of review. It's members should be appointed by the Commons and this process should be transparent and cross-party in nature.
Yes, it should be replaced by a jury of the national public.
No but it does need serious reform
@9B84XHJ2yrs2Y
The King should be the head of this country.
It should be replaced with a body elected by proportional representation
It should be elected members only. If not, abolish it.
@96HZKQ22yrs2Y
Yes, and make it a senate with either MMPR (Mixed-Member Proportional Representation) or full-PR (proportional representation). Make sure these elections do not clash with general elections.
@96HZKQ22yrs2Y
Yes, and make it a senate with either MMPR (Mixed-Member Proportional Representation) or full-PR (proportional representation). Make sur these elections do not clash with general elections.
No, it should be replaced with a proper democratic parliamentary upper house
No, but remove hereditary peers
@95HNYFZ3yrs3Y
Replaced by normal people
should be reformed, PR voting every 10-15 years
Yes, but replace with a house filled with experts on all possible relevant issues
@93ZM58R3yrs3Y
We need a second chamber . We still need checks. Reform it.
No but let the people have more of a say in who gets in
Yes, they should be elected and serve fixed terms
@93V9NGLWomen's Equality3yrs3Y
The corruption should be abolished
@93RMJDK3yrs3Y
It should be replaced by an electable body
@93GP7JD3yrs3Y
Should become a publicly elected House of Lords (PR)
@93FJ6TH3yrs3Y
No, but drastically reduce the numbers of peers elevated and make it mandatory for them to renounce political party membership so as to vote on legislation out of principle and not following a party line.
@93DLB6N3yrs3Y
Hereditary Peers should be abolished, but experts in their fields should not.
No but it should be directly elected
No, but remove their veto power
@92MTQRQ3yrs3Y
The house of lords should be replaced by a wholely elected and reformed second chamber
No, but it should be reformed to make it more democratic
An elected 2nd chamber. Keep the name.
No, but it should be elected or at least impartially appointed.
No, but it should be experts only
@8YH3D693yrs3Y
No it should be replaced by an elected second house
@8YFD5LF3yrs3Y
No, but they should remove hereditary peers and bishops as well as increasing the number of lords elected by the panel
Yes, but reform the House or Lords. Such as having no hereditary peers, and implementing retirement age.
remove inherited lordship
No, but reform it into a technocratic system
@8Y3WK8D3yrs3Y
Yes, and replaced with an elected chamber consisting of experts across all fields and union leaders to provide policy advice
It should be more elected
@8X6SSFK3yrs3Y
No, but remove the spiritual and hereditrary peers.
no but the appointment system should be revised and it should remain a smaller house than the commons
@8WGSP8V3yrs3Y
The House of Lords should be reformed to be a primarily elected chamber, akin to the House of Lords Reform Act 2012.
should be reformed, no hereditary peers and make it much smaller
Needs replacing and reforming
Yes, and replaced with an elected chamber.
i believe it needs reform to make sure the house is entirely politically unbiased
Appointed members predicated upon genuine educational and political grounding aid in stability, however, to achieve such a position educational and social opportunities and welfare for the country must be wholly bettered, as to allow for bettered representation for the ‘working masses’. Education being key in terms of proportional representation, with a focus on preventing misinformation as a keystone of politicking, and the removal of hereditary peers and bishops.
@8V5M7964yrs4Y
Replaced with a a different body (e.g. senate and Congress)
@8TSRLKX4yrs4Y
It should be abolished but replaced with a wholly elected upper house.
@8TQVB6K4yrs4Y
Yes, and replaced with an elected chamber using proportional representation.
Not abolished but no hereditary seats: all members should be elected in some way or another.
No. It should be reformed and elected by PR.
No, it needs reform not removal
No, it needs to be reformed so it is wholly elected. I used to support abolition as it is undemocratic.
Yes but replaced by elected body
This is a difficult one! Do we want more career politicians, cos we do need a second house, checks and balances etc al we certainly don't want more cronies of whichever government is in power either
Yes unless they are fully elected by the people and must be from a range of walks of life and fairly represented by percentage of the population ie the uk is not made up entirely of older white privately educated males!
No but be elected by the people and must be from a range of walks of life and fairly represented by percentage of the population ie the uk is not made up entirely of older white privately educated males!
@cutewommyLabour4yrs4Y
No, but a second elected chamber
@8SC9BZ44yrs4Y
Only if it doesn't become a wholly elected body
@8S8ZZ37Plaid Cymru4yrs4Y
Yes, replace it with an elected body
Yes, but a different, elected, structure should be put in place to scrutinise laws.
Yes and replaced with a wholly elected second chamber
It should be massively reformed into an elected congress.
No, but make it wholly elected, with no more than 350 members
Yes - but should be replaced with an elected senate
No but more relegation is needed
The function of the upper chamber should remain the same but it should not be comprised of unelected officials
Make the House of Lords be elected
No but it should be elected. It is important that a group holds the House of Commons to account.
it should be wholly elected
No, but reform and modernise.
No, but it should be reformed into a wholly elected chamber, and proportionally representative too.
No, but they should be elected by the UK public.
@9CHMXDG2yrs2Y
No, reform to the extent where the name is changed, those within it are democratically elected, but must be experts and are restricted in their political affiliation to avoid having an adversarial House like the Commons
Removal of hereditary and religious positions
No, but members should be elected by democratic means
Loading the political themes of users that engaged with this discussion
Loading data...
Join in on more popular conversations.
