HOUSE OF LORDS

Wanganui Chronicle, Volume 76, Issue 301, 21 December 1933, Page 7

HOUSE OF LORDS

PROPOSALS FOR REFORM GREATER POWERS SOUGHT SAFETY FROM LABOURITES LONDON, Dee. 19. In the House of Lords, Lord Salisbury moved a private Bill for the reform of the Lords by reducing the membership and strengthening its pow'ers to impose delay on legislation. The Bill is based on proposals submitted by tho Small Committee, and was designed to secure Britain against any sudden subversive changes. The measure proposes that the hereditary element be reduced to 150 peers, with 150 added from outside, plus peers of the blood Royal, members of the Episcopal bench on a reduced scale, and a number of Law Lords, the total membership to bo about 320. Lord Hailsham, said he would net vote for the introduction of the Bill, but the Government had not considered the subject, and he would not express an opinion on the measure. Leave to introduce the Bill was given by 84 to 35. Lord Salisbury, citing Sir Stafford Cripps’ speeches on Labour’s intentions, said: “We should be insane if we did not take precautions to prevent the country unknowingly not dreaming of the consequences, being exposed tu a Labour Government.” He had never been able to understand the attacks on the hereditary principle, which permeated the whole of our society. “We are not fighting for rights but for obligations. It would be contemptible to suggest that we are fighting for privileges. We are here because we believe we can render a service to the country. If it dos not want us let us go home.” The reform of the Lords had been an issue for half a century. At the moment when the dangers of a Labour success are demonstrably formidable, when Conservative and Liberals alike are determined to resist them, it seems a hopeful moment to submit a Bill to strengthen the constitution and powers of the Lords. Consolidating Conservatism. Lord Ponsonby moved the rejection of the Bill on the ground that its intention was to consolidate Conservative dominance in the Upper House. It was an attempt to use the Government’s passing majority in a jerrymander constitution in favour of the Tory Party. Lord Beading agreed that the Bill would not only increase the power of the Lords, but would give it a dominant Conservative majority. “We should be taken back to the bad old days be fore 1911, which it was thought had been disposed of once and for all.” Lord Astor, while favouring the Lords’ reform, thought that Lord Salisbury’s Bill would maintain all the disadvantages of the present constitution. He would prefer to be nominated to a hereditary House. Lord Ackerman said that the Lords should not be empowered to over-ride the House of Commons.