Life Commoners

Press, Volume CII, Issue 30028, 12 January 1963, Page 10

Life Commoners

The proposal to permit peers to seek or retain membership of the House of Commons, in effect creating the new status of Life Commoners, is a very modest reform of the House of Lords, more apt to satisfy the importunate Lord Stansgate (formerly Mr Wedgwood Benn, MJ*.) than to remedy any great constitutional evil Indeed, a good many who prize the admitted usefulness of this anachronistic second chamber do not regard the proposal as a reform at all. But Conservative (and other) doubts about allowing peers the unique privilege of eligibility for either House of Parliament without prejudice to their heirs will be less significant than the difficulty of squeezing the proposal into a tight legislative programme, already under pressure by the great E.E.C. debate and the possibility of an early General Election. Not many politicians of any party, least of all of the party now in office, are likely to regard the proposal of the Joint Select Committee as a matter of real urgency. The opportunity for peen to give up their seats in the House of Lords would have been afforded in 1948 if the inter-party committee had been able to reach full agreement on a much more comprehensive reorganisation of the House. The committee's negotiations broke down on the powers to be given a reformed House of Lords. One of the principal reasons why reform has proceeded

slowly is the fear of both the Liberal and Labour Parties that any more logical chamber would gain in authority and would be able to strengthen its position against the House of Commons. While it remains a quaint constitutional relic (though performing valuable administrative and legislative services) it is unable to interfere with the wishes of the electorate as represented in the House of Commons. It would be a different matter if it acquired the standing of, say, the United States Senate. The new proposal suits the Labour and Liberal Parties very well, because it would be likely to draw the ablest peers into the more exciting and rewarding life of the House of Commons, thus reducing, instead of increasing, the prestige of the House of Lords. That might then become the preserve of the Life Peers and the refuge of the "backwoodsmen" of British politics. This probability is, of course, why so many Conservatives are unenthusiastic about letting peers into the representative chamber. Some Conservatives have personal reasons, too, because if Lord Hailsham and Lord Home could sit tn the House of Commons they would become strong rivals for leadership of the party. Lord Stansgate has not yet won his long and skilful battle to rejoin the Labour front bench; and some more fundamental and useful changes in the constitution may be necessary before he does.