Photo credit: www.theguardian.com
The Labour Party has made a commitment in its manifesto to reduce the size of the House of Lords, which has seen significant growth over the past 20 years. The government has initiated legislation aimed at removing hereditary peers, with the proposal currently proceeding through parliament. However, the plan to establish a mandatory retirement age of 80 for members of the House now faces uncertainty. If both initiatives were implemented, the size of the upper house would have been significantly reduced.
This article delves into the demographics of the House of Lords, examining aspects such as age, gender, educational background, and political affiliations of its members, while also discussing the potential implications of the proposed legislative changes.
Hereditary and Life Peers
Historical chart of the size of the Lords
Since the last Labour government’s House of Lords Act in 1999, which reduced the count of hereditary peers from 758 to 92, life peers have come to dominate the chamber. Life peers, appointed by political parties or the House of Lords Appointments Commission, hold their titles for life.
Additional members include 26 bishops and six judges, with the judicial seats reflecting the chamber’s earlier status as the highest court in the UK before the establishment of the Supreme Court in 2009.
Interestingly, not all hereditary peers enjoy equal status; specific positions are reserved for the earl marshal and the lord great chamberlain.
The rest of the hereditary peers are elected through byelections conducted upon the retirement or death of a sitting peer, with voting rights limited to those already seated in the Lords.
Following Labour’s seizure of power, byelections for hereditary peers were put on hold. A government bill introduced in September is anticipated to pass soon, which would likely see the remaining hereditary peers removed by the close of the current parliamentary session in July.
Tony Blair’s reforms effectively shrank the Lords from 1,210 to 692 members, yet the total has swelled to 836 as subsequent prime ministers have actively utilized their capacity to appoint new peers.
Retiring Older Peers
Chart depicting the ages of peers
The average age among members of the House of Lords stands at 71, significantly exceeding the UK state pension age by five years. In stark contrast, the average age of the general UK population is just above 40 according to data from the Office for National Statistics.
Labour’s initial commitment to introduce an 80-year mandatory retirement age included a provision for members to serve until the conclusion of a parliamentary cycle. The proposal was projected to result in the retirement of nearly 300 life peers by the end of the current parliament.
However, these plans now appear to be under reconsideration due to pushback from within the Lords.
The oldest sitting member is Tony Christopher, a 99-year-old trade unionist, who has been absent from duties since 2021.
Currently, there are very few peers under the age of 40, with Carmen Smith, at 28, making history as the youngest life peer when appointed in March 2024.
Lords: Labour’s Challenges
Chart representing the impact of changes on political parties
Should the arbitration age of 80 be enforced, it would predominantly impact Labour’s standing in the House of Lords compared to the Conservatives. By the conclusion of this parliamentary term, 43% of Labour life peers will have reached the age of 80, while only 31% of Conservative peers will be in the same position.
This discrepancy raises concerns about Labour’s capacity to effectively pass legislation through the chamber after the upcoming election. The party’s manifesto stated that the current size of the Lords was excessive, and bringing in younger peers now could be perceived as contradictory.
If hereditary peers were to be removed immediately, the Conservative Party would experience a loss of 45 members, while Labour would only lose four. This adjustment would narrow the difference in party representation within the chamber to a mere three percentage points.
Should an 80-year retirement policy follow, analysis suggests the Conservatives would face a drop of 72 members, while Labour may lose a staggering 90. Consequently, the party distribution could shift to 35% Conservative and 26% Labour.
These statistics likely elucidate why proposals for mandatory retirement have lost momentum.
Women in the House
Chart illustrating potential gender balance changes
Stella Isaacs, Baroness Swanborough, made history in October 1958 as the first female member in the contemporary House of Lords, even though a few abbesses participated in parliaments during the 13th century.
It wasn’t until the Peerage Act of 1963 that women gained the right to sit as hereditary peers, a privilege rarely exercised due to the male majority in hereditary titles.
No prime minister has appointed more women than men historically. However, under Keir Starmer’s leadership, of the 65 peers appointed, a remarkable 35 are women.
Since 2015, women have also held seats on the bishops’ bench, following the appointment of Rachel Treweek as the bishop of Gloucester, which facilitated the inclusion of female bishops in the Lords. Women currently occupy nearly one-third of the bishops’ roles.
Currently, there are a total of 260 female peers, with the largest contingent being 89 from Labour.
Chart displaying gender balance across parties
The Old Boys’ Network
David Cameron once remarked that the Houses of Parliament resemble “half a museum, half a church, half a school,” yet it embodies a distinctive educational backdrop, more akin to Eton College rather than a typical school environment. A notable portion of the upper chamber comprises individuals who attended elite privately educated institutions.
Source
www.theguardian.com