**Dozens of hereditary peers are set to lose their seats in the House of Lords, after the passage of a bill that will end a parliamentary role dating back hundreds of years.**
Peers passed the House of Lords (Hereditary Peers) Bill after ministers offered a compromise to end a long-running dispute with opponents of the reform.
The majority of hereditary peers, who inherit their titles through their families, were abolished in 1999 under the last Labour government and this bill abolishes the last remaining 92.
Lords Leader Baroness Smith said the “historic legislation” realised Labour’s manifesto pledge to remove the right of all hereditary peers to sit and vote in the upper house.
“This has never been about the contribution of individuals but the underlying principle that was agreed by Parliament over 25 years ago that no-one should sit in our Parliament by way of an inherited title,” Baroness Smith said.
“Over a quarter of a century later, hereditary peers remain whilst meaningful reform has stagnated.
“We have a duty to find a way forward.”
Baroness Smith confirmed the government would offer life peerages to some of the Conservatives and crossbenchers who would otherwise lose their seats.
As a result, the Conservatives withdrew their opposition to the bill.
Up to 92 hereditary peers will leave the Lords when the current session of Parliament ends, which is expected to be in May.
The Conservative leader in the Lords, Lord True, said he accepted the government’s mandate to end hereditary membership of the upper house.
Confirming the Tories would no longer fight the bill, he said he had always believed there was a need to dial down “eternal [parliamentary] ping-pong” even though the compromise would be a bitter pill for some on his side to swallow.
In another compromise, the government also plans to increase the number of paid ministers in the Lords – some have worked without a salary due to restrictions in the current law.
One of the departing hereditaries, the Earl of Devon, said the bill was regrettable.
He said his family had been in the Lords for 900 years and complained the notice period was less than required in employment law.
“I think the public will miss us,” the Earl of Devon said.
He added: “We should be proud to sit here as embodiments of the hereditary principle dating back a millennium.”
Baroness Smith said interim measures had been in place for 25 years since the first hereditaries were removed under Tony Blair’s government in the 1990s.
Ministers are looking at further reforms with a possible retirement age and minimum participation rates.
The bill is now set to become law.
MetalBawx on
Are they going to remove all the people Boris sold peerages to? Feel that’s the biggest issue considering one of them is the son of an ex KGB agent…
jibjap on
I think the earl of Devon may be mistaken about people missing “doesn’t Google Earl of Devon”
2_years_ago on
personally I’d like to see the house of lords become a thing of the past.
ViridiaGaming on
Great, so now rather than a bunch of inheritors who are theoretically free of electoral pressure being able to look at an issue objectively (okay, the ‘theoretically is doing a lot of hard work here) we now get a smorgasbord of “yes you dodged paying taxes, and yes you may have done questionable things for corporations/foreign nations in office, but here, have a lifetime peerage and carry on!”
ByteSizedGenius on
Good. Doesn’t solve all the Lord’s problems but it’s a step.
jungleboy1234 on
i am off to the shops tomorrow morning to buy some bubbles to celebrate.
mightypup1974 on
I’m honestly sad to see them go, as most of the remainder were decent and not politicians. It doesn’t address the central issue of the power of the PM to appoint at will, even if I think election would be a worse choice.
Both-Mud-4362 on
The house of lords should just be made of people who are genuine experts in their field who have academically published world recognised research in their field in the last 5yrs before application.
Valcenia on
A step in the right direction but until the Lords becomes an elected body it still remains an undemocratic and unaccountable institution
fujoshimoder on
Doesn’t seem to be much of an improvement considering the willingness of governments to give peerages to their personal yes men.
hime-633 on
I like this *in theory*.
Practically I am much more concerned with the stuffing full of the upper house with pals of whoever the latest disgraced and defenestrated PM is.
A House of Lords filled with people who have demonstrated brilliance, compassion, competence, grassroots activisim, community-building in their fields of expertise and their local communities over decades – yes, please! Oversight us! Perhaps we could choose them from MBEs?
A House filled with people who sort of made things slightly easier at best or probably just “not as difficult” on the understanding that they get to cosplay being Lord / Dame Fancy-Pants in the Honors List and beyond? (And those who just outright bought their place).
No, nobody wants this and fuck you for thinking you know better than the Commons.
cedarvhazel on
Quote from article
One of the departing hereditaries, the Earl of Devon, said the bill was regrettable.
He said his family had been in the Lords for 900 years and complained the notice period was less than required in employment law.
“I think the public will miss us,” the Earl of Devon said.
Oh dear you’ve lot your privilege because you were born to privilege- so sad – now in other news!
DukePPUk on
The Conservatives opposed this in part because of the 92 hereditary peers, over half are Conservative either by law or by convention (although currently 6 of them don’t sit as Conservatives). While not all other peers are small-c conservative, they tend to be rather old and rather male (there hasn’t been a female hereditary peer since 2020).
> Baroness Smith said interim measures had been in place for 25 years since the first hereditaries were removed under Tony Blair’s government in the 1990s.
Interim measures to fix the House of Lords have been in place **for over a century**. To quote the introduction to the Parliament Act 1911:
> … whereas it is intended to substitute for the House of Lords as it at present exists a Second Chamber constituted on a popular instead of hereditary basis, but such substitution cannot be immediately brought into operation
> And whereas provision will require hereafter to be made by Parliament in a measure effecting such substitution for limiting and defining the powers of the new Second Chamber, but it is expedient to make such provision as in this Act appears for restricting the existing powers of the House of Lords.
The Parliament Act was an interim measure, put in place until a proper second chamber could be implemented. That – and everything done since – are interim measures until we can fix the anachronism that is the House of Lords.
odysseushogfather on
the average peer in the house of lords costs £50K in expenses per year (not even including catering), next time you see about hundreds of thousands being spent on something just pick yoursen up by remembering we’ve saved £4.6 mil a year right here (and seen off a bunch of horrible aristocrats)
Low_Border_2231 on
The place is such a mess that we can probably trust these hereditary peers who have no ties to anyone vs people appointed by politicians. It obviously on principle is abhorrent.
drifterlady on
“”I think the public will miss us,” the Earl of Devon said.”
No, we won’t. Members of the lucky sperm club can go. They’ve held back progress for a long time. Good riddance.
17 Comments
**Dozens of hereditary peers are set to lose their seats in the House of Lords, after the passage of a bill that will end a parliamentary role dating back hundreds of years.**
Peers passed the House of Lords (Hereditary Peers) Bill after ministers offered a compromise to end a long-running dispute with opponents of the reform.
The majority of hereditary peers, who inherit their titles through their families, were abolished in 1999 under the last Labour government and this bill abolishes the last remaining 92.
Lords Leader Baroness Smith said the “historic legislation” realised Labour’s manifesto pledge to remove the right of all hereditary peers to sit and vote in the upper house.
“This has never been about the contribution of individuals but the underlying principle that was agreed by Parliament over 25 years ago that no-one should sit in our Parliament by way of an inherited title,” Baroness Smith said.
“Over a quarter of a century later, hereditary peers remain whilst meaningful reform has stagnated.
“We have a duty to find a way forward.”
Baroness Smith confirmed the government would offer life peerages to some of the Conservatives and crossbenchers who would otherwise lose their seats.
As a result, the Conservatives withdrew their opposition to the bill.
Up to 92 hereditary peers will leave the Lords when the current session of Parliament ends, which is expected to be in May.
The Conservative leader in the Lords, Lord True, said he accepted the government’s mandate to end hereditary membership of the upper house.
Confirming the Tories would no longer fight the bill, he said he had always believed there was a need to dial down “eternal [parliamentary] ping-pong” even though the compromise would be a bitter pill for some on his side to swallow.
In another compromise, the government also plans to increase the number of paid ministers in the Lords – some have worked without a salary due to restrictions in the current law.
One of the departing hereditaries, the Earl of Devon, said the bill was regrettable.
He said his family had been in the Lords for 900 years and complained the notice period was less than required in employment law.
“I think the public will miss us,” the Earl of Devon said.
He added: “We should be proud to sit here as embodiments of the hereditary principle dating back a millennium.”
Baroness Smith said interim measures had been in place for 25 years since the first hereditaries were removed under Tony Blair’s government in the 1990s.
Ministers are looking at further reforms with a possible retirement age and minimum participation rates.
The bill is now set to become law.
Are they going to remove all the people Boris sold peerages to? Feel that’s the biggest issue considering one of them is the son of an ex KGB agent…
I think the earl of Devon may be mistaken about people missing “doesn’t Google Earl of Devon”
personally I’d like to see the house of lords become a thing of the past.
Great, so now rather than a bunch of inheritors who are theoretically free of electoral pressure being able to look at an issue objectively (okay, the ‘theoretically is doing a lot of hard work here) we now get a smorgasbord of “yes you dodged paying taxes, and yes you may have done questionable things for corporations/foreign nations in office, but here, have a lifetime peerage and carry on!”
Good. Doesn’t solve all the Lord’s problems but it’s a step.
i am off to the shops tomorrow morning to buy some bubbles to celebrate.
I’m honestly sad to see them go, as most of the remainder were decent and not politicians. It doesn’t address the central issue of the power of the PM to appoint at will, even if I think election would be a worse choice.
The house of lords should just be made of people who are genuine experts in their field who have academically published world recognised research in their field in the last 5yrs before application.
A step in the right direction but until the Lords becomes an elected body it still remains an undemocratic and unaccountable institution
Doesn’t seem to be much of an improvement considering the willingness of governments to give peerages to their personal yes men.
I like this *in theory*.
Practically I am much more concerned with the stuffing full of the upper house with pals of whoever the latest disgraced and defenestrated PM is.
A House of Lords filled with people who have demonstrated brilliance, compassion, competence, grassroots activisim, community-building in their fields of expertise and their local communities over decades – yes, please! Oversight us! Perhaps we could choose them from MBEs?
A House filled with people who sort of made things slightly easier at best or probably just “not as difficult” on the understanding that they get to cosplay being Lord / Dame Fancy-Pants in the Honors List and beyond? (And those who just outright bought their place).
No, nobody wants this and fuck you for thinking you know better than the Commons.
Quote from article
One of the departing hereditaries, the Earl of Devon, said the bill was regrettable.
He said his family had been in the Lords for 900 years and complained the notice period was less than required in employment law.
“I think the public will miss us,” the Earl of Devon said.
Oh dear you’ve lot your privilege because you were born to privilege- so sad – now in other news!
The Conservatives opposed this in part because of the 92 hereditary peers, over half are Conservative either by law or by convention (although currently 6 of them don’t sit as Conservatives). While not all other peers are small-c conservative, they tend to be rather old and rather male (there hasn’t been a female hereditary peer since 2020).
> Baroness Smith said interim measures had been in place for 25 years since the first hereditaries were removed under Tony Blair’s government in the 1990s.
Interim measures to fix the House of Lords have been in place **for over a century**. To quote the introduction to the Parliament Act 1911:
> … whereas it is intended to substitute for the House of Lords as it at present exists a Second Chamber constituted on a popular instead of hereditary basis, but such substitution cannot be immediately brought into operation
> And whereas provision will require hereafter to be made by Parliament in a measure effecting such substitution for limiting and defining the powers of the new Second Chamber, but it is expedient to make such provision as in this Act appears for restricting the existing powers of the House of Lords.
The Parliament Act was an interim measure, put in place until a proper second chamber could be implemented. That – and everything done since – are interim measures until we can fix the anachronism that is the House of Lords.
the average peer in the house of lords costs £50K in expenses per year (not even including catering), next time you see about hundreds of thousands being spent on something just pick yoursen up by remembering we’ve saved £4.6 mil a year right here (and seen off a bunch of horrible aristocrats)
The place is such a mess that we can probably trust these hereditary peers who have no ties to anyone vs people appointed by politicians. It obviously on principle is abhorrent.
“”I think the public will miss us,” the Earl of Devon said.”
No, we won’t. Members of the lucky sperm club can go. They’ve held back progress for a long time. Good riddance.