Faced with the unpleasant prospect of actually having to run for office, members of the House of Lords declared Monday that their chamber had functioned pretty well without elections for hundreds of years and that there was no need to rush into anything now.
"It is, by definition, not elected."
House of Commons supported a plan to end government appointments to the House of Lords and to make it an all-elected body. But while the suggestion — that it makes sense in a modern democracy for legislators to be democratically elected — does not sound particularly radical, some lords reacted as if "election" were a four-letter word.
Some contended that people were sick of politicians, and sick of having to vote for them. Others said that if one had to campaign to acquire a seat in the Lords, no decent candidates would want to run. The members said that an elected House of Lords would threaten the supremacy of the House of Commons, that elections would be too expensive and too complicated, that elected members were, in fact, less independent than appointed ones.
"The House of Lords is good at the job it does, and the country knows it,” Baroness Boothroyd said. “The future of our Parliament is at risk if we upset the balance between the two houses that has served this country well."
The House of Lords now has 731 members, a majority chosen for life by the government of the day. But so varied are the proposals and so complicated the potential repercussions that as the debate wore on, it was clear that there was no consensus. Some peers said the chamber should be half-elected, half-appointed; others said that the proportion should be different.
Quote: 19th century journalist and essayist Walter Bagehot urged all deliberate consideration. "The reason is that all important English institutions are relics of a long past; that they have undergone many transformations that, like old houses which have been altered many times, at first sight would not be imagined," he said. "Very often a rash alterer will pull down the very part which makes them habitable."
The so-called cash-for-peerages scandal: the government has been accused of offering membership in Lords in exchange for party donations.
"I have seen, as I traveled, 100-percent-elected second chambers which do work effectively," she said. "What I do want to defend is the ancient and honorable tradition of people to choose their legislators. It is a far from modern idea." Quoting Mark Twain, she summarized opponents' attitude: "I'm all for progress; it's change I can't stand."
"It is, by definition, not elected."
House of Commons supported a plan to end government appointments to the House of Lords and to make it an all-elected body. But while the suggestion — that it makes sense in a modern democracy for legislators to be democratically elected — does not sound particularly radical, some lords reacted as if "election" were a four-letter word.
Some contended that people were sick of politicians, and sick of having to vote for them. Others said that if one had to campaign to acquire a seat in the Lords, no decent candidates would want to run. The members said that an elected House of Lords would threaten the supremacy of the House of Commons, that elections would be too expensive and too complicated, that elected members were, in fact, less independent than appointed ones.
"The House of Lords is good at the job it does, and the country knows it,” Baroness Boothroyd said. “The future of our Parliament is at risk if we upset the balance between the two houses that has served this country well."
The House of Lords now has 731 members, a majority chosen for life by the government of the day. But so varied are the proposals and so complicated the potential repercussions that as the debate wore on, it was clear that there was no consensus. Some peers said the chamber should be half-elected, half-appointed; others said that the proportion should be different.
Quote: 19th century journalist and essayist Walter Bagehot urged all deliberate consideration. "The reason is that all important English institutions are relics of a long past; that they have undergone many transformations that, like old houses which have been altered many times, at first sight would not be imagined," he said. "Very often a rash alterer will pull down the very part which makes them habitable."
The so-called cash-for-peerages scandal: the government has been accused of offering membership in Lords in exchange for party donations.
"I have seen, as I traveled, 100-percent-elected second chambers which do work effectively," she said. "What I do want to defend is the ancient and honorable tradition of people to choose their legislators. It is a far from modern idea." Quoting Mark Twain, she summarized opponents' attitude: "I'm all for progress; it's change I can't stand."
No comments:
Post a Comment