91Èȱ¬

91Èȱ¬ BLOGS - Newsnight: Michael Crick
« Previous | Main | Next »

Lord Monkswell and the "hereditary principle"

Michael Crick | 17:40 UK time, Wednesday, 30 September 2009

On a street corner inside the conference area this afternoon, I came across an old friend, Baron Monkswell, whom I first knew in Stockport 35 years ago when he was just plain Gerry Collier.

Lord Monkswell is one of just 18 or so hereditary peers who support the Labour Party.

He's in Brighton this week, as most years, acting as a conference steward. He wears the usual flourescent yellow stewards' jacket, rather different from the red ermine robes of the House of Lords, where he sat as a Labour peer, until most of the hereditaries were expelled from the house a decade ago.

Monkswell failed to secure election as one of the 92 hereditaries allowed to remain in the upper house. And he failed again at a subsequent by-election (where, absurdly, the electorate was just three people - the three Labour hereditaries who survived after the fourth Labour hereditary died).

Yesterday Gordon Brown told the Labour conference that the "hereditary principle" would be removed from the Lords within the next 12 months. It sounded like a new pledge to expel all hereditaries from the Lords within a year. In fact it merely means the abolition of the by-election system which allows hereditaries who die to be replaced.

Brown's pledge is nothing new. Jack Straw announced it a few weeks ago. So even if the change goes through hereditaries will survive in the upper house until further reform, or they all die out (which could take 50 or 60 years) .

As for Lord Monkswell, he's totally against having any hereditary peers in the Lords, yet he confirms as long as the current system remains as it is, he will contest any by-elections until the system is changed.

So he may have only a few months to get back to the Lords benches. And that will depend anyway on one of the existing four Labour hereditary peers dying, and his winning the subsequent by-election.

Comments

  • Comment number 1.

    There can now only be one solution for the House of Lords: turn into into a fully elected chamber.

    There are those who say that an elected upper house would clash with the Commons. My answer to that is we need a bit of creative tension in this country.

  • Comment number 2.

    we also need an elected head of state. why should we be asked to spend blood and treasure to install a level of democracy in the most run down parts of the world that we do not have here?

    we also need a new nation oath and anthem that actually has something about the nation in it and not something from a monarchy role gamers camp fireside song book.

  • Comment number 3.

    MANAGEMENT AND GOVERNANCE

    Why all the complexities in one, whereas the other thrives on simplicity?
    Is it that chicanery need crevices?

    All you need a a group of dedicated individuals, of maturity and integrity, focused on governance; which is EXACTLY what we haven't got.

    SPOIL PARTY GAMES

  • Comment number 4.

    If any change to the House of Lords is to be made it really must be to have a fully elected House.
    Let the hereditary peers die out, but please, not a fully appointed chamber.
    In the meantime there should be some block on the system that allows anybody to be given a peerage simply to fill a ministerial role. The fact that a Prime Minister could, if he or she desired, have a cabinet comprised solely of unelected peers is potentially so undemocratic I'm surprised the loophole hasn't been closed already.

  • Comment number 5.

    I suspect that a commitment to an elected Lords may well be in Labour's manifesto.

    But . . shhhhh . . . I think it will be meant as a surprise, a bit of wrong footing all round.

    Good place to try out PR/AV or w.h.y? too.

  • Comment number 6.

    Hereditary house of lords (with established interests in the UK) or appointed cronies (with loyalty to those who give them their titles)?

    How foolish has the british electorate become :(

Ìý

91Èȱ¬ iD

91Èȱ¬ navigation

91Èȱ¬ © 2014 The 91Èȱ¬ is not responsible for the content of external sites. Read more.

This page is best viewed in an up-to-date web browser with style sheets (CSS) enabled. While you will be able to view the content of this page in your current browser, you will not be able to get the full visual experience. Please consider upgrading your browser software or enabling style sheets (CSS) if you are able to do so.