Proposed new law to tackle cronyism in Lords ‘would enhance public trust’

A proposed new law to reform the House of Lords appointments process would tackle cronyism and “enhance public trust”, Parliament heard.

Conservative peer Lord Norton of Louth argued that the reputation of the upper chamber is damaged by how peers are chosen and said the rules need to be tightened to emphasise merit.

His private member’s bill would put the House of Lords Appointments Commission (Holac) on a statutory footing, giving them the power to block nominations.

Any person deemed unsuitable would not be able to have their name put forward again for two years.

The House of Lords (Peerage Nominations) Bill would also require nominations to include an explanation of how each person meets the criteria for a peerage, injecting a “fresh air of transparency” and ruling out those whose only credentials are as a party donor.

Lord Norton told the unelected chamber these reforms are “necessary for the House to maintain its claim to legitimacy”, both in the quality of its work and how members arrive there.

He said: “If we are to do our job effectively, in effect justify our existence, we need to maintain a membership characterised by experience and expertise.

“We also need to be seen to bring in members who can make a distinctive contribution.”

The Tory peer added: “The public derive their view of this House, not from what it does, but from how members are selected and from how some behave.

“Enacting this Bill will enhance the work of the House through bringing in members qualified to carry out its functions and tackle the distrust that now engulfs the nominations process.

“The provisions are modest relative to what the public want …

“If we don’t make changes now, then more radical reform beckons.”

The chamber heard how 73% of these recent appointments were either former MPs, trade unionists or had worked for the Labour Party.

Lord Norton also hinted that one reason Holac needs to be given more powers is because Boris Johnson ignored its recommendation not to give Russian media mogul Lord Lebedev a peerage on “national security” grounds.

He said: “It can be argued that no Prime Minister would think of getting rid of Holac, but the point is that they could.

“It could have been argued that no Prime Minister would think to ignore a recommendation of Holac as to the appointment of peers, but they could, and as we know have done.”

The Bill had support from a number of peers from across the House, including former Labour home secretary Lord Blunkett, who said that having a “justifiable” process is important for the public perception of the Lords.

However, others argued that the Bill gives too much power to Holac, branded a “private, secret, unelected group” by Tory peer Lord Leigh of Hurley, a co-founder of Cavendish Corporate Finance.

Several peers suggested that the Prime Minister, who is elected, has more of a mandate than Holac to decide who gets a peerage.

Former special adviser to ex-Brexit secretary David Davis, Lord Jackson of Peterborough, said the Bill would “embed, semi-permanently, an already closed and opaque system of appointment and result in the establishment of an unaccountable, undemocratic and self-perpetuating body, whose members share the same liberal metropolitan viewpoint and hostility to those who take a contrary opinion”.

However, Lord Norton questioned how accountable the Prime Minister really is for their appointments.

He said: “When was the last time a Prime Minister was held accountable in any meaningful form for nominations to this house?

“The Prime Minister is not the one who suffers in any significant manner, it is this house that gets the political opprobrium.

“Under this Bill, the Prime Minister would remain the sole person responsible for submitting names to the monarch, but he or she would work within a process designed to ensure that those being nominated were and seem to be highly qualified.”

Without these reforms, Lord Norton noted that the ousting of hereditary peers will mean the Prime Minister will soon have “exclusive unrestrained power” to create members of the upper house.

Lord Kennedy of Southwark, the Government’s chief whip in the Lords, said Labour has an “ambitious programme” of reform in the Lords and work is under way,

However, the Government does not support the proposals in Lord Norton’s Bill, he said.

Lord Kennedy told peers: “The Government has committed to reforming the process of appointments to the second chamber to ensure the quality of new appointments and seek to improve the national and regional balance of this House.

“But this Bill represents a fundamental shift in the roles and responsibilities of the appointments system that risks undermining the proper lines of accountability.”

The Bill passed its second reading in the House of Lords on Friday.