LABOUR want to axe all hereditary peers from the House of Lords but let them retain their access to Westminster as a sweetener, reports suggest.
The 92 hereditary lords would still be allowed to enjoy access to Parliament’s bars and subsidised restaurants, the Financial Times has reported.
Labour previously vowed to abolish the unelected upper chamber of Parliament, with Sir Keir Starmer having branded it “undemocratic”.
Constitutional reforms championed by the party’s former prime minister Gordon Brown called for the Lords to be replaced with an elected chamber representative of the UK’s nations and regions, and won the backing of the current Labour leadership.
READ MORE: SNP ask Gordon Brown 20 questions on 'fundamentally flawed' plans
However in yet another U-turn in recent months, the party has suggested it would delay its plans for reforming the upper chamber if it were elected to Government in order to prioritise other measures.
Now the party appears to have committed to some reform, according to the FT, which reports Labour would act swiftly to remove the right of hereditary peers’ to sit in Lords.
The reforms, which it is understood are not finalised, would bring an end to the system of aristocratic families who have inherited their peerages holding elections among their numbers to join Parliament’s revising chamber.
Like all peers, the hereditary lords can claim a daily £342 attendance allowance.
READ MORE: New Lords include Tory donors, MSP and youngest ever life peer
There are more than 800 members of the House of Lords, with 92 seats set aside for hereditary peers since the last time the chamber faced reforms under the Blair government.
The number of hereditary peers who can sit in the Lords was limited in 1999, after Sir Tony trimmed more than 600 of their colleagues from the chamber.
The move could also be politically beneficial for Labour, as the majority of the hereditary peers, 47, are Conservative, while only four have the Labour whip.
A Labour spokesperson said: “Labour will abolish the House of Lords to ensure the UK’s second chamber better reflect our regions and nations. An incoming Labour government will inherit a mess and need to prioritise.
“The first term will take steps toward significant reform of the chamber.”
Why are you making commenting on The National only available to subscribers?
We know there are thousands of National readers who want to debate, argue and go back and forth in the comments section of our stories. We’ve got the most informed readers in Scotland, asking each other the big questions about the future of our country.
Unfortunately, though, these important debates are being spoiled by a vocal minority of trolls who aren’t really interested in the issues, try to derail the conversations, register under fake names, and post vile abuse.
So that’s why we’ve decided to make the ability to comment only available to our paying subscribers. That way, all the trolls who post abuse on our website will have to pay if they want to join the debate – and risk a permanent ban from the account that they subscribe with.
The conversation will go back to what it should be about – people who care passionately about the issues, but disagree constructively on what we should do about them. Let’s get that debate started!
Callum Baird, Editor of The National
Comments: Our rules
We want our comments to be a lively and valuable part of our community - a place where readers can debate and engage with the most important local issues. The ability to comment on our stories is a privilege, not a right, however, and that privilege may be withdrawn if it is abused or misused.
Please report any comments that break our rules.
Read the rules hereLast Updated:
Report this comment Cancel