Reforming the House of Lords:
The Establishment strikes back
"Things can only get better," was Tony Blair's campaign song for the 1997 General Election.
But for one institution, in May 1997 the outlook was bleak.
The Labour party swept to power with a huge majority - and reform of the House of Lords was high on their list of manifesto promises. The hereditaries, it seemed were on their way out.
The grand project to reform the Lords began straightforwardly enough the year after Blair's first election victory. A bill to abolish hereditary peers was announced in the Queen's Speech that Autumn: historic reform was promised.
In the end, a secret deal saved some 92 hereditary peers from the chop, as the price of letting the legislation pass unscathed.
But the government got rid of the old second chamber without any clear idea of what to put in its place.
Those proposals satisfied no-one, and in May 2002, the government effectively decided to rip it all up and start again.
The question of where next for the second chamber will be put to a committee of both houses of parliament. It will consider every option, from a completely elected second chamber, to a totally nominated upper house, as we have at present.
Using material from the BBC's news archives, this website tells the story of how the grand project to reform the Lords hit the buffers.
Why should our social “betters” have the final say in government?
Does a nominated upper house give party leaders too much power of patronage?
In fact, why do we want a second chamber at all?
This website has been designed, in conjunction with the Open University, to be read from start to finish. But you can, of course, pick whatever topic you want to begin with.
|Back to Top|