In December, the fee chaired by Gordon Brown for the Labour Social gathering proposed formidable reform of the Home of Lords, to create an elected ‘Meeting of the Nations and Areas’. On this first of two posts contemplating Labour’s choices for Lords reform, Meg Russell dissects the proposals, within the mild of earlier UK and worldwide expertise. She means that the Brown report leaves a lot element unspecified, making formidable Lords reform unlikely earlier than the second or third 12 months of a Labour authorities.
The fee chaired for Labour by Gordon Brown, reported in December, proposing that the Home of Lords must be changed by an elected ‘Meeting of the Nations and Areas’. This submit explores the deserves of its proposals, and the way possible they’re, as the primary of two posts contemplating Labour’s choices for Lords reform. The 2 posts summarise arguments in a report back to be collectively revealed on Friday by the Structure Unit, the Institute for Authorities and the Bennett Institute on the College of Cambridge.
The Brown fee wished a reformed Home of Lords to underpin and strengthen the UK’s territorial settlement. A lot of its report was centered on financial inequalities and the advantages of decentralising energy, plus a need to strengthen the Union and discourage separatism. The proposals for the second chamber appeared late within the report, after varied proposed reforms to devolution, and had been supposed to tie the entire system collectively.
Whether or not such an Meeting of the Nations and Areas might efficiently meet these targets would rely upon three issues: its features, its composition, and the practicalities of implementation. Every of those is taken into account briefly under, within the mild of earlier Lords reform proposals, and abroad expertise.
Capabilities: significant territorial illustration in a second chamber
At its core, the thought within the Brown report was removed from new. Labour’s 2015 manifesto had promised ‘an elected Senate of the Nations and Areas’ and exactly the identical phrases then appeared within the occasion’s 2019 manifesto. Nonetheless neither provided a lot additional element. In a minimum of a weak sense, all main proposals for elections to the second chamber prior to now 25 years might be seen to suit this mannequin – together with the plans from the Wakeham Royal Fee of 2000, varied Labour proposals between then and 2010 and Nick Clegg’s failed invoice of 2011–12 throughout the Conservative/Liberal Democrat coalition. All of those recommended elections primarily based on giant regional/nationwide constituencies, which might replicate the UK’s devolution preparations.
The Brown report went additional than earlier proposals in contemplating potential territorially centered features for such a chamber. It recommended new roles, to supervise intergovernmental our bodies inside the UK, monitor regional financial inequalities and scrutinise a brand new class of native laws, alongside ‘a brand new function of safeguarding the UK structure’ – comprising enhanced powers over an outlined set of constitutional statutes. The final of those proposals, for constitutional entrenchment, has since been pretty totally mentioned elsewhere.
The UK’s particular devolution preparations current vital challenges to a second chamber fulfilling territorial features (in addition to to its composition – under). The legislatures in Scotland, Wales and Northern Eire all have totally different powers and tasks. In the meantime, some areas of England have metropolis/area mayors, however others have no devolved degree of presidency in any respect. Bringing representatives of all these areas collectively in a second chamber would subsequently be very totally different from the extra ‘one measurement matches all’ mannequin that exists in lots of different second chambers, notably in federal states. If the second chamber is to debate the influence of UK-level choice making on devolved issues, these considerably differ space by space. As well as, the UK lacks ‘shared’ competencies between Westminster and the devolved nations, of a sort extra widespread in different methods. This leaves questions on which new issues members of a second chamber of the nations and areas may fruitfully talk about, and the way.
However these relatively distinctive traits of the UK should not the one impediment to significant territorial illustration in a second chamber. Whereas many second chambers ostensibly exist to carry out this function, complaints that they fail to take action are extraordinarily widespread – main one professional to counsel that they’re ‘structurally unable to develop into efficient fora for subnational participation within the nationwide decision-making course of’. In international locations reminiscent of Australia, straight elected senators are sometimes criticised for primarily representing their political events relatively than their states. Even the place second chamber members are not directly elected by members of subnational legislatures, related complaints usually apply. The simplest territorial second chamber might be the German Bundesrat, whose members are themselves members of state governments, however that’s troublesome to duplicate. Even the not directly elected South African second chamber, whose design was influenced by the Bundesrat, together with via requiring members to vote in provincial (relatively than occasion) blocks, has been accused of failing in its territorial function. The place territorial second chambers exist, intergovernmental co-ordination nonetheless tends to function via boards which might be fully separate from them. Therefore abroad expertise means that – on the very least – questions of features and process would wish cautious consideration in designing a genuinely territorial second chamber.
A further impediment is separatism: separatist events have resisted strengthening the territorial roles of second chambers in international locations reminiscent of Canada and Spain. Within the UK, the SNP likewise has little curiosity in strengthening the Union. Not all key gamers can subsequently be anticipated to try to make a significant second chamber of the nations and areas work.
Composition: electing a second chamber of the nations and areas
Whereas the Brown report went additional than earlier proposals in contemplating new features for a territorial second chamber, it was far much less detailed than they had been on questions of composition. The report said that the brand new physique ‘must be markedly smaller than the current Lords, [and] chosen on a special electoral cycle’, however added that ‘the exact composition and technique of election [are] issues for session’. Whereas not formally a suggestion, it indicated that the second chamber may need round 200 members.
But it’s the element of composition that has usually scuppered earlier proposals. There are various necessary issues to be resolved earlier than a second chamber of the nations and areas might be put in force.
Previous proposals have all recommended that the boundaries for election to a reformed second chamber must be 9 giant English areas, plus Northern Eire, Scotland and Wales. When the Royal Fee reported this made apparent sense, as Labour initially supposed to maneuver to elected regional authorities primarily based on these areas. However its plans collapsed following defeat of proposals for a north-east regional meeting in a referendum in 2004. Till Brexit these identical areas had been used for European Parliament elections, however their administrative goal has largely now expired. In England, it will clearly be troublesome to map electoral boundaries for a second chamber onto current devolved buildings. And whereas the Brown report espoused future English devolution, it was intentionally non-prescriptive concerning boundaries, which means such developments could take a very long time.
Earlier proposals have usually agreed that the electoral system for the second chamber must be proportional, primarily based on region-wide constituencies – which might create complementarity with the Home of Commons, and certain be certain that no single occasion loved a majority within the second chamber. Choices embody ‘open’ or ‘closed’ lists, or the one transferable vote (STV) system. The Brown report says nothing on this, however selections would clearly be mandatory.
The division of seats between areas is a difficult query. This has been little debated beforehand, with a common assumption that seats could be distributed primarily based on inhabitants. However in lots of territorial second chambers elsewhere this isn’t the case – e.g. the Australian Senate and US Senate each allocate equal numbers of seats per state, no matter inhabitants, whereas Germany makes use of a compromise between this and inhabitants. A calculation in 2000 estimated that whereas equality in a 240-seat chamber for the UK would give 20 seats to every of 12 areas, a division by inhabitants would give Northern Eire simply six, Wales 12 and Scotland 21, versus 32 for the south-east of England and 29 for London. Equality of seats in second chambers is meant to make sure that much less populous areas can’t be so simply outvoted as within the first chamber. Even equality may supply comparatively little assurance to the smaller nations. However a population-based allocation of seats might see London and the south-east of England collectively far outweighing Northern Eire, Scotland and Wales put collectively.
The electoral cycle and phrases of workplace are crucial points, which have obtained substantial consideration beforehand. To keep away from clashes of mandate between the chamber and the Home of Commons nearly all packages over the previous 25 years have proposed staggered elections in order that not all second chamber members are elected directly. This sample is extraordinarily widespread abroad, leading to senators serving longer phrases of workplace than members of the decrease chamber. Most earlier packages have favoured election in thirds for non-renewable phrases of 12–15 years. The Brown report didn’t contemplate this query.
The report additionally differed considerably from most earlier proposals when it comes to the measurement of the chamber. Earlier packages have usually beneficial 400–600 members – which might guarantee significant proportionality at every election, notably if the chamber had been elected in elements. There are additionally apparent questions concerning the chamber’s functioning if it had as few as 200 members, together with the proportion who would serve on the frontbench, and the power to keep up current valued committees.
Earlier proposals for elections to the second chamber have additionally principally recommended retaining some appointed members. This might enable continuation of a considerable non-party professional factor, whereas defending towards claims that the second chamber has higher electoral legitimacy than the Home of Commons. The Royal Fee’s proposals, Labour’s white papers of 2001, 2007 and 2008, and the Clegg proposals all proposed reserving 20% of seats for appointed independents. The Brown fee was clearly cut up on this level, with a footnote indicating that one member favoured retaining some appointed members.
One other solution to dilute the democratic legitimacy of a reform chamber, in addition to strengthening its territorial foundation, could be the inclusion of not directly elected members. The Brown report hinted that this is likely to be fascinating. However it will be troublesome: with no apparent our bodies from which to attract members all through most of England, and members of devolved legislatures being absolutely occupied, principally at a big distance from Westminster.
It’s putting that on varied of those factors earlier proposals had reached constant conclusions, which differ from these of Brown.
Practicalities of implementation
The Brown proposals had been explicitly introduced for session, and the above dialogue reveals that there’s a lot element nonetheless to contemplate.
If the aim of a second chamber of the nations and areas is to bind the devolution settlement collectively, engagement with key figures from past Westminster, notably on the devolved degree, is clearly important. Session must also meaningfully interact the general public, ideally via deliberative workouts reminiscent of residents’ assemblies. On condition that the Brown proposals sit inside wider ambitions to develop the UK’s devolution preparations, session would wish to dovetail with that wider session. However that is clearly a significant enterprise.
It’s going to at all times be troublesome for a celebration in opposition to run a passable session, given lack of sources and the truth that different actors might not be sufficiently motivated to have interaction. Governments, in the meantime, have entry to acceptable sources, and will entice some co-operation even from political opponents as soon as it’s clear that plans are more likely to be put in force. So whereas Labour can usefully start discussions concerning the particulars of a radically reformed second chamber now, it appears inevitable that these might want to proceed if and when the occasion enters energy.
All of this makes it unlikely that concrete motion on the formidable Brown proposals might be taken earlier than the second or third 12 months of a Labour authorities.
This submit previews Meg Russell’s report, Home of Lords Reform: Navigating the Obstacles, to be collectively revealed by the Structure Unit, Institute for Authorities and Bennett Institute for Public Coverage. A second submit will seem alongside publication of the report on Friday.
In regards to the writer
Meg Russell FBA is Professor of British and Comparative Politics at UCL and Director of the Structure Unit.
