The House of Lords is an archaic Parliamentary institution that was established in the 14th century and has since become a pillar of British politics. This pillar in question, however, is finally beginning to crumble, and UK citizens might be gifted with the opportunity to abolish the outdated and highly-flawed custom. Amid recent scandal and mounting criticism from the Labour party, it seems as though people are re-evaluating the value of this unelected upper house.
The House of Lords, aka the House of Commons’ pompous older cousin, has always been a point of contention among the British public—particularly within younger generations. The upper chamber’s original purpose was to challenge the government over legislation and help improve the quality of laws passed in the UK. However, its effectiveness—due to a number of different concerns—has been questioned for quite some time now.
The most prominent debate that has arisen is the fact that members (or peers, as they’re often referred to) are unelected and therefore rise to political power through familial ties, financial prowess, or religious influence, rather than due to a mandate from the public. A similarly controversial feature of the Lords is the ‘Life Peers’ element. Ultimately, this means that, once elected, a member can serve in Parliament throughout their life—and their position within the institution is wholly protected.
According to Sky News, Labour leader Keir Starmer has explicitly stated that if he were elected Prime Minister, he would “abolish” the House of Lords during his first term. Starmer would then replace the current chamber with another group of elected officials whose public mandate would make the second-check concept far more democratic.
The politician has deemed the current House of Lords as indefensible and has claimed that, once in office, he would pursue Labour’s flagship proposal titled ‘New Britain’. The blueprint, headed by former PM Gordon Brown, outlines a mass transfer of power out of Westminster and Whitehall.
There is definitely a vast amount of cynicism among politicians and pundits who’ve witnessed an array of Prime Ministers vow to abolish the House of Lords, only to ultimately surrender later down the line and swear to the public that the institution’s value supersedes its shortcomings.
The Guardian, who has deemed the House of Lord “the laughing stock of democracy,” aptly summed up the current standings of the chamber by stating: “The second-debating purpose is certainly of value, but the nation’s voice should not be obscured by the language of aristocracy in a plush retirement home in the metropolis.”
However, it should be noted that, in the past, Prime Ministers have only ever recommended reform. Whereas in this case, if elected, Starmer is insisting he will completely abolish the upper house—thereby sending a much stronger statement.
It currently appears that the Labour party leader may have a helping hand in securing the public’s support for his future abolishment plans. It has come to light that Tory peer Michelle Mone secretly received £29 million which had originated from the profits of a PPE (personal protective equipment) business that was awarded large government contracts after she recommended it to ministers, as reported by The Guardian.
Investigations have discovered that, via the help of Lady Mone, specialist manufacturer PPE Medpro secured a place in the coveted “VIP lane”: a selective pool used by government officials during the COVID-19 pandemic to prioritise companies that had political connections.
Documents have since been unearthed that reveal tens of millions of pounds from PPE Medpro’s profits had been wired to a secret offshore account of which Mone and her children were the beneficiaries.
Now, it has been announced that Baroness Mone will take an official leave of absence from the House of Lords. A spokesperson for the disgraced peer stated: “With immediate effect, Baroness Mone will be taking a leave of absence from the House of Lords in order to clear her name of the allegations that have been unjustly levelled against her.”
The British government’s reputation is already at an all-time low. The public have endured a ruthless and heartbreaking pandemic, three Prime Ministers in a year, a heightened mental health crisis, and a devastating cost of living crisis—topped off by another textbook Tory scandal.
The House of Lords is truly crumbling from the inside out. However, it must be said that age-old British political institutions always seem to find a way to remain standing and propping up the aristocracy as it goes.
So, there you have it. Rishi Sunak is the third Prime Minister in 2022. The third since September 2022, in fact. He becomes the first non-white PM in the history of the United Kingdom, as well as the richest ever, with Sunak and his wife’s combined net worth listed as £730 million. Personally, I’m suspicious of anyone that rich—why not just retire to a life of luxury?
Earlier this year—what feels like a lifetime ago—Sunak lost to Liz Truss during the previous Tory leadership contest, gaining the support of more MPs but only 42.6 per cent of the members’ votes. Now, he’s secured the top job after Truss’ economic plan proved irredeemably disastrous. If Sunak had simply won the first time round, perhaps we’d have avoided six weeks of uncertainty and chaos, and still be in roughly the same position as we are now. It feels a bit like a fever dream already.
Second time around, he secured the gig by default: Penny Mordaunt, incumbent Leader of the House of Commons who also ran in July, dropped out on Monday 24 October. Whether or not Sunak has a democratic mandate to run the country is debatable, given that we have a parliamentary democracy and the Conservatives were elected with a large majority in 2019. But Truss reneged on various manifesto promises and, based on previous campaign promises, Sunak might do the same. Although it’s too soon to tell, if history repeats itself—which it often does—we’re surely in for a tumultuous ride.
Boris Johnson—the disgraced former PM who flew back from the Caribbean to court his fellow MPs—announced on Sunday 23 October that he would not formally be joining the race, despite allegedly having secured the necessary support. It should be noted that he never once proved this fact. Two nonconsecutive terms as Prime Minister would be unusual but isn’t unprecedented. In fact, Johnson’s hero, Winston Churchill, did just that—first during World War II and again in the early 1950s.
However, Johnson is still facing an investigation from the Privileges Committee as to whether or not he intentionally misled the parliament over Partygate. If found to have done so, he may be required to stand down as an MP. Had he joined the race and won—he’s significantly more popular among Tory party members than either Truss or Sunak—he may have been out again before Christmas. I was quietly hoping this would be how things panned out: it would be an utter disaster for the Tories and they would have no choice but to call a general election. Sadly, no such luck.
Sunak gave a wooden speech soon after winning the job. “There is no doubt we face a profound economic challenge,” he said. “We now need stability and unity. And I will make it my utmost priority to bring our party and our country together. Because that is the only way we will overcome the challenges we face and build a better, more prosperous future for our children and our grandchildren.” What does this mean exactly? Who knows. At this stage, it feels like party leader Mad Libs.
It would be nice to know how he plans to bring both his party and the country together, during a period of turmoil that threatens the long-term stability of both.
The Prime Minister concluded: “I pledge that I will serve you with integrity and humility, and I will work day in, day out, to deliver for the British people.” Given that Sunak was also implicated in Partygate, which helped to bring Johnson down, his integrity is questionable. His eventual resignation signaled the beginning of the end for Johnson’s premiership and many Johnson loyalists still don’t trust him—so how this plays out could be interesting, to say the least.
Sunak’s first appointments were thoroughly disappointing. Suella Braverman returns as Home Secretary less than a week after resigning the post for breaking ministerial code—so much for “integrity.” James Cleverly remains as Foreign Secretary and Michael Gove is back in the cabinet, after being fired by Johnson a few months ago. The only silver lining is that, after a couple of years in genuinely important positions, Jacob Rees Mogg is no longer in cabinet and returns to the back benches where, hopefully, his influence will be limited.
So, will Sunak last? It’s impossible to know. His fiscal policy is likely to be harsh, but less experimental than his predecessor’s. The parliamentary Tory party needs to present a united front. If they cannot get behind the new PM, a general election is a necessity. The majority party should be able to pass the government’s legislation.
Lately, many Tory MPs have been divisively ideological rather than pragmatic, but the threat of an electoral wipeout might mean that they begin to compromise. Current polling puts the party at an all-time low in terms of electoral popularity—some models give them less than twenty seats were a general election to be held today, with Labour taking an unprecedented super majority and the Scottish National Party (SNP) sitting as opposition.
The next important event is Monday 31 October’s fiscal statement from Jeremy Hunt, assuming he isn’t suddenly removed as Chancellor. This will lay out what’s to come over the winter, in terms of spending cuts and support for the vulnerable—as well as what to expect from Sunak’s premiership in general.