An Elected Upper House and Other Fallacies

Author: PEARCE, EDWARD

Source: The Political Quarterly, Volume 80, Number 4, December 2009 , pp. 495-501(7)

Buy & download fulltext article:

Price: $48.00 plus tax (Refund Policy)

Abstract:

All fashionable political talk is of an elected House of Lords. Doing this smart, new unthought-out thing, says Edward Pearce, means dissolving the reliably rebellious upper house regularly rejecting bad bills from Tory and Labour governments, for a House as submissive as the Commons. Second-line politicians will replace the difficult individual people, soldiers, doctors, academics, scientists, assorted and distinguished experts who, by lucky muddle, go there today.

Far better, he says, to abolish actual titles which create a false idea of privilege, but continue drawing upon independent professional specialists. Also, Ministers should be barred from the pernicious Mandelson Effect, of making an instant Minister by life-ennoblement, huge powers conferred without a voter in sight. An upper house called `The Upper House', chosen as now for competence, will be a House of Commoners, of Independence, of Contradiction. Elected Party-liners under guidance would be a House of Sheep.

Keywords: Elected Lords Fallacy; End Titles; House of Lords

Document Type: Research article

DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-923X.2009.02054.x

Affiliations: 1: After many years as sketch writer and columnist for the Telegraph, Guardian and others, has spent the last ten years writing history. His critical account on the Elder Pitt is published in January by the Bodley Head.

Publication date: 2009-12-01