+

Toggle voterbase

Statistics are shown for this demographic

Answer Overview

Response rates from 348k UK voters.

61%
Yes
33%
No
53%
Yes
20%
No
8%
Yes, and with proportional representation
9%
No, but remove hereditary peers and bishops
5%
No, appointed members provide stability and progress instead of political deadlock

Historical Support

Trend of support over time for each answer from 348k UK voters.

Loading data...

Loading chart... 

Historical Importance

Trend of how important this issue is for 348k UK voters.

Loading data...

Loading chart... 

Other Popular Answers

Unique answers from UK voters whose views went beyond the provided options.

 @9JBZT7N answered…1yr1Y

No, but I think it should be reformed, not have inheritable titles, and be made up in experts of all fields to assess efficacy of laws passed in the commons.

 @B2LKX3Qanswered…1mo1MO

A second chamber should be economic, with representatives of different industries elected by trade unions

 @9Z9KQ6K  from Maine  answered…2mos2MO

Yes, the house of lords should be a body based on academic knowledge to act as a balance to the house of commons

 @9Z9KQ6K  from Maine  answered…2mos2MO

Yes, the house of lords should be a body based academic knowledge to act as a balance to the house of commons

 @9QCVFRDanswered…8mos8MO

No, but the positions should be more diverse (eg all regions represented) or appointed specialisms (law, business, or environment) and time limits on how long they can serve.

 @9Q9LLXGanswered…8mos8MO

Hereditary peers should be abolished. Religious peers should be limited to one per main religion. Some peers to be elected by PR but on a fixed term. Other peers to be independently appointed based on prior work for society, expertise etc.