THE House of Lords totally fails to represent swathes of the UK because a high proportion of peers are from London and the south-east and east of England, the head of the Electoral Reform Society (ERS) has said.
MPs will debate a petition in Westminster Hall today calling for a referendum on the abolition of the House of Lords.
Darren Hughes, chief executive of the ERS, criticised the “appalling centralisation” of Parliament’s second chamber, saying it is increasingly like another Westminster private members’ club.
ERS analysis of the membership of the Lords found 54% of the 564 peers whose residence is known live in either Greater London, the south east or the east of England.
It showed 5% said they live in the north-west of England – where 11% of the population lives, according to the campaign organisation.
The figures also showed that out of 816 peers, there were 235 former politicians, 68 political staffers and 13 civil servants. Hughes said: “These figures reveal the appalling centralisation of Parliament’s second chamber. This London-dominated house totally fails to represent huge swathes of the UK.
“Other parts of the country are not only under-represented, but those peers who say they live there do not represent each region’s diversity, whether in terms of their politics or otherwise.
“The Lords is looking increasingly like just another Westminster private members’ club, and it’s not hard to see why when the system is so unbalanced. Adding to the detachment between the House of Lords and UK citizens is the fact so many peers are former politicians.
“When the PM can stuff a so-called scrutiny chamber with whoever they want, the result is it fails to reflect the nation.
“That won’t be solved by bunging in a few more unelected cronies. Instead, a fairly elected chamber of the regions would ensure guaranteed, proportional representation and a strong voice for all parts of the UK.”
Why are you making commenting on The National only available to subscribers?
We know there are thousands of National readers who want to debate, argue and go back and forth in the comments section of our stories. We’ve got the most informed readers in Scotland, asking each other the big questions about the future of our country.
Unfortunately, though, these important debates are being spoiled by a vocal minority of trolls who aren’t really interested in the issues, try to derail the conversations, register under fake names, and post vile abuse.
So that’s why we’ve decided to make the ability to comment only available to our paying subscribers. That way, all the trolls who post abuse on our website will have to pay if they want to join the debate – and risk a permanent ban from the account that they subscribe with.
The conversation will go back to what it should be about – people who care passionately about the issues, but disagree constructively on what we should do about them. Let’s get that debate started!
Callum Baird, Editor of The National
Comments: Our rules
We want our comments to be a lively and valuable part of our community - a place where readers can debate and engage with the most important local issues. The ability to comment on our stories is a privilege, not a right, however, and that privilege may be withdrawn if it is abused or misused.
Please report any comments that break our rules.
Read the rules here